[License-review] For approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 2)

[Simon Phipps]

On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:55 AM Pamela Chestek <pamela at chesteklegal.com>
wrote:

>
> I don't follow your distinction. All objectionable impairments can be
> framed as conditions on the license.


I'm restating the earlier observation that the user data is not impacted
outside its use by the software, so concerns that the license is somehow a
data license seem over-reaching.


> "This license is granted on the
> condition that you water my plants on Thursday." So plant-watering is
> properly the subject matter of an open source license?
>

Only if the software related to it. In this case the license is clearly
designed for use-cases where the user data is material to the software and
its deployment on the Internet, so a term relating to it does not seem
inappropriate.

I'm still lacking concern that the data dimension of this license is
problematic in beta 2/3.

S.
(personal view)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190823/3a6e44fc/attachment-0001.html>