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

[VanL]

Hi Bruce,

On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 1:10 PM Bruce Perens <bruce at perens.com> wrote:


> That said, I am finding that our constant little diversions into "but the
> AGPL does this" are really a distraction from the CAL license evaluation
> rather than contributing to the discussion. What if approving AGPL was
> actually a mistake? I am not saying it was, but OSI does not insist on
> following its previous mistakes when evaluating new submissions.
>

If you want to argue that the AGPL should not be considered open source,
then you can clearly do that. I don't believe that is a consensus view, but
some people have also expressed that opinion.

However, on the assumption that most people accept the AGPL as both open
source and properly supporting software freedom, it seems reasonable and
useful to show how the most analogous license would work in similar
circumstances to the CAL.

Thanks,
Van
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190823/4f90b795/attachment.html>