[License-review] OSD #9 would not make SSPL OSD-incompliant

[Bruce Perens]

Well, we have sufficient reason to reject the SSPL not counting OSD #9,
simply because the overreach is so large that it's not honestly an Open
Source license. We're not falling on our swords because of this. And we can
fix OSD #9 with a two word addition "or performed" as soon as the board can
meet. But it's annoying. OK, I didn't have any lawyers that would help me,
not even Larry Rosen.

    Thanks

    Bruce

On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 12:59 PM Lawrence Rosen <lrosen at rosenlaw.com> wrote:

> Bruce Perens wrote:
>
> > The title of each definition is a summary necessarily limited by its
> length. The definition is the meat, and unfortunately I did not write it in
> a way that would apply to software that is not distributed.
>
>
>
> Bruce, please don't apologize for not entirely foreseeing the future. You
> did great! :-) Several of us clarified your oversight in our own
> OSI-approved licenses. For example, OSL 3.0 expressly says "distribute *or
> communicate* copies of the Original Work and Derivative Works to the
> public," and it separately defines "External Deployment" in a very
> specific, network-oriented, way. We covered for your oversight. Our
> licenses take precedence.
>
>
>
> /Larry
>
>
>
> Lawrence Rosen
>
> Rosenlaw (www.rosenlaw.com)
>
> 3001 King Ranch Rd., Ukiah, CA 95482
>
> Cell: 707-478-8932
>
> This email is licensed under CC-BY-4.0
> <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/>. Please copy freely.  [image:
> https://licensebuttons.net/l/by/4.0/88x31.png]
>
>
>
> *From:* License-review <license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org> *On
> Behalf Of *Bruce Perens
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 23, 2018 12:29 PM
> *To:* License submissions for OSI review <
> license-review at lists.opensource.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [License-review] OSD #9 would not make SSPL OSD-incompliant
>
>
>
> The title of each definition is a summary necessarily limited by its
> length. The definition is the meat, and unfortunately I did not write it in
> a way that would apply to software that is not distributed.
>
>
>
> I'm very sorry.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 12:24 PM Smith, McCoy <mccoy.smith at intel.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> *From:* License-review [mailto:license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org]
> *On Behalf Of *Bruce Perens
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 23, 2018 12:15 PM
> *To:* License submissions for OSI review <
> license-review at lists.opensource.org>
> *Subject:* [License-review] OSD #9 would not make SSPL OSD-incompliant
>
>
>
> Folks,
>
>
>
> The OSD terms were not written for software-as-a-service. OSD #9 very
> clearly states
>
>
>
> The license must not place restrictions on other software that is
> *distributed* along with the licensed software. For example, the license
> must not insist that all other programs *distributed on the same medium*
> must be open-source software.
>
> Since software-as-a-service software is not distributed, OSD #9 doesn't
> apply. Sorry. The document was written for another time and I could not
> predict today's conditions.
>
>     Thanks
>
>     Bruce
>
>
>
> Isn’t this OSD 9:  “License Must Not Restrict Other Software”?
>
> The part you quote seems to be explanatory of the definition, but not
> necessarily limiting.  I’ve been drafting a mail to license-discuss on OSD
> 9 and how I think it ought to be interpreted, but this seems to be an
> important question: what is the **D* *part of the OSD.
>
> It also seems curious to me that you can put **more** restrictions on
> software on non-distributed media than you can on distributed media, but
> perhaps there is some history of that part of the OSD that I’m unaware of.
> To me, the example text you have reproduced is written that way because it
> inherently assumes Freedom Zero.
>
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
>
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Bruce Perens K6BP - CEO, Legal Engineering
> Standards committee chair, license review committee member, co-founder,
> Open Source Initiative
>
> President, Open Research Institute; Board Member, Fashion Freedom
> Initiative.
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
>
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
>


-- 
Bruce Perens K6BP - CEO, Legal Engineering
Standards committee chair, license review committee member, co-founder,
Open Source Initiative
President, Open Research Institute; Board Member, Fashion Freedom
Initiative.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20181023/754b897c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1393 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20181023/754b897c/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1393 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20181023/754b897c/attachment-0001.png>