[License-review] ESA-PL Weak 2.3

[Tzeng, Nigel H.]

Hmmm...I forgot to ask about this but is NOSA 1.3 (and potentially NOSA 2.0) compatible with ESA-PL_Weak?

I don't know if ESA-PL was voted on so this might be OBE.

On 5/6/18, 9:48 AM, "License-review on behalf of Carsten Gerlach" <license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org on behalf of cgerlach at tcilaw.de> wrote:

    On 05.03.2018 12:22, Patrice-Emmanuel Schmitz wrote:
    > Another question to Carsten Gerlach:
    > 
    > The “weak” ("reasonable" or "moderated" sounds better) copyleft
    > ESA-PL_Weak provides the right to (re-)distribute the Software and/or
    > Modifications under a compatible licence. 
    > Annex A lists only two licences: the GNU GPL v2 and later and the CeCILL
    > v2 or later.
    > 
    > Questions:
    > 1. Why not the GNU/AGPL, knowing that the ESA-PL_Strong covers SaaS
    > (point 3.4 which differs from tha ESA-PL_Weak)?
    
    The AGPL could be added to the list of compatible licenses, but was not
    considered by the ESA licensing board due to its limited practical
    relevance in the space industry. Generally, the list of compatible
    licenses was to be kept as short as possible and based on the prior
    experience of the agency.
    
    > 2. Why not the EUPL v1.2, which should be considered since ESA is
    > "quasi" a specific European Agency (even if some members differ),
    > knowing that CeCILL v2.1 is compatible with the EUPL (and the reciprocate)? 
    > NB: in addition, the EUPL V1.2 authorises specific agreements concerning
    > applicable law and arbitration, where CeCILL refers to the French law
    > only and to the court of Paris
    
    See above. Additionally, since CeCILLv2.1 permits the license switch to
    the EuPL, it was felt that no explicit permission was necessary.
    
    Kind regards, Carsten
    
    _______________________________________________
    License-review mailing list
    License-review at lists.opensource.org
    http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org