[License-review] For Approval: License Zero Reciprocal Public License

[Tzeng, Nigel H.]

I think you have three issues.

First, I don’t think you two are talking about the same draft.

Second, I don’t believe your license achieves the goal you desire because ultimately what you want isn’t open source

And finally, it appears to me that it may be possible to easily circumvent your intent because the business entity can make their changes under BSD and simply not provide source to any of the internal users of the derivative work fulfilling both BSD and L0R requirements. No one else is legally authorized to make that source available to anyone...not even the actual coders. The requirement for a public repo isn’t in the last draft.

I think...because I’m not sure the last draft I read really is the last draft.

You can continue to patch your license to close loopholes but attempting to force commercial users to pay the developers ultimately isn’t open source. It’s a shared source model with dual licensing.

/shrug

I’m not against that desire, and in fact am for it, but you’re trying to do something the OSD guards against.

There’s also no reason to allow this license to pass muster while also stating non-commercial source available licenses isn’t “open source”.

At the end of the day both try to achieve the same goal: make commercial users pay for using the work.

From: Kyle Mitchell <kyle at kemitchell.com<mailto:kyle at kemitchell.com>>
Date: Tuesday, Oct 24, 2017, 8:49 PM
To: License submissions for OSI review <license-review at opensource.org<mailto:license-review at opensource.org>>
Subject: Re: [License-review] For Approval: License Zero Reciprocal Public License

On 2017-10-24 17:10, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Can we get back to writing licenses now, please?

Yes, I'd love to.  But frankly, apart from waiting to hear
back from Richard and McCoy, and giving your latest message
its second read, I'm feeling less and less like I know what
to do.

To give a sense, it came as a surprise to read that you
think a draft---which draft?---is OSD-conformant as revised.
I think that's the first vote of such confidence I've heard
on the conformance question.

I'm equally tempted to stand on whatever you think conforms,
ask that it be reported to the board, and wait for whatever
feedback comes of that, on the one hand, or to rewrite the
whole thing from scratch with a free hand, best I can, on
the other.

--
Kyle Mitchell, attorney // Oakland // (510) 712 - 0933
_______________________________________________
License-review mailing list
License-review at opensource.org
https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20171025/fc12ce8f/attachment.html>