[License-review] [Non-DoD Source] Re: Some notes for license submitters

[Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US)]

I'm excerpting one statement below:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: License-review [mailto:license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org] On Behalf Of Luis Villa
> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 11:57 PM
> To: License submissions for OSI review <license-review at lists.opensource.org>
> Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [License-review] Some notes for license submitters
>
> *	How should notice requirements respond to state-of-the-art in app stores, package managers, GitHub, SPDX, and general
> trend towards "WTFPL"-attitude in next-generation open source development? (What current licenses *say*, and what all these
> *do*, are often at odds in ways that would be very profitable for a determined troll.)

Hrm, that wasn't stated enough...

> *	How should notice requirements respond to state-of-the-art in app stores, package managers, GitHub, SPDX, and general
> trend towards "WTFPL"-attitude in next-generation open source development? (What current licenses *say*, and what all these
> *do*, are often at odds in ways that would be very profitable for a determined troll.)
>
> *	How should notice requirements respond to state-of-the-art in app stores, package managers, GitHub, SPDX, and general
> trend towards "WTFPL"-attitude in next-generation open source development? (What current licenses *say*, and what all these
> *do*, are often at odds in ways that would be very profitable for a determined troll.)
>
> *	How should notice requirements respond to state-of-the-art in app stores, package managers, GitHub, SPDX, and general
> trend towards "WTFPL"-attitude in next-generation open source development? (What current licenses *say*, and what all these
> *do*, are often at odds in ways that would be very profitable for a determined troll.)
>
> *	How should notice requirements respond to state-of-the-art in app stores, package managers, GitHub, SPDX, and general
> trend towards "WTFPL"-attitude in next-generation open source development? (What current licenses *say*, and what all these
> *do*, are often at odds in ways that would be very profitable for a determined troll.)
>
> *	How should notice requirements respond to state-of-the-art in app stores, package managers, GitHub, SPDX, and general
> trend towards "WTFPL"-attitude in next-generation open source development? (What current licenses *say*, and what all these
> *do*, are often at odds in ways that would be very profitable for a determined troll.)

Where there is money, there is someone unscrupulous enough to find a way to get at it.  The USG has a lot of money...

New licenses are often put in place to cover holes that old licenses don't cover.  That is what the NOSA 2.0 license (and the license I proposed way back when) were for; to cover holes that the standard OSI licenses don't cover.


Thanks,
Cem Karan

---
Other than quoted laws, regulations or officially published policies, the views expressed herein are not intended to be used as an authoritative state of the law nor do they reflect official positions of the U.S. Army, Department of Defense or U.S. Government.