[License-review] For approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4)

[VanL]

Bruce,

I think people understand your scenario. The problem is that you are not
arguing about the license. You are arguing about imagined future business
conduct.

Van

__________________________
Van Lindberg
van.lindberg at gmail.com
m: 214.364.7985

On Fri, Dec 6, 2019, 7:28 PM Bruce Perens via License-review <
license-review at lists.opensource.org> wrote:

>
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 4:46 PM Josh Berkus <josh at berkus.org> wrote:
>
>> If anything, we've stated categorically that we cannot enforce "moral"
>> behavior through licensing.  Heck, if Holochain is using patents to
>> enforce user ownership of data, that seems like moral behavior anyway.
>
>
> Thank you for taking the time to understand the scenario.
>
> Rather than being a moral consideration, it's directly related to our
> mission to protect Open Source and facilitate its development and use
> everywhere. We would create, by our adoption of a license, an area in which
> interoperable software under any of the so-far-approved Open Source
> licenses *can not participate.* If we are to be good stewards of Open
> Source, we should not *constrain* Open Source this way.
>
>     Thanks
>
>     Bruce
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
>
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20191206/1cf8c50b/attachment.html>