[License-review] Please rename "Free Public License-1.0.0" to 0BSD.

[Nigel T]

I agree... -1


Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 16, 2018, at 9:13 AM, Josh Berkus <josh at berkus.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/16/2018 12:45 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 06:45:03AM +0100, Simon Phipps wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2018, 06:38 Josh Berkus, <josh at berkus.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I'm still not keen on calling anything "BSD" that has no historical
>>>> relationship to Berkeley, but apparently I'm alone in that opinion.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I share this concern. BSD is not related to the license author's trademark
>>> as far as I am aware.
>> 
>> Back in 2015 I and one or more others pointed out that one problem
>> with the "Zero Clause BSD" name is that the license is not textually
>> based on any version of the BSD license -- rather, it is an alteration
>> of the ISC license. I think Rob Landley has acknowledged this but has
>> pointed out that use of the well-known "BSD" in the name would assist
>> with marketing and explaining the license.
> 
> Eh?  Then why not call it the 0GPL then?  That's an even more
> recognizable license name.
> 
> We should not be in the business of approving license names that deceive
> users.  -1 from me.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Josh Berkus
> 
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org