[License-review] For Approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License

[Pamela Chestek]

Bruce,

Thanks very much, your opinions have been noted.

Pam Chestek
Director, Open Source Initiative.

On 5/10/19 6:01 PM, Bruce Perens via License-review wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 2:19 PM VanL <van.lindberg at gmail.com
> <mailto:van.lindberg at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     This discussion seems to be going around in circles.
>
>
> I agree that we may have reached Josh's arbitrary limit of 100
> messages at which point people not involved in the process seem to
> give up upon it. However, it is premature to say it's going in circles
> when we have just raised the issue of how OSI's need to consider
> software freedom, specifically Freedom Zero, and when we have just
> discussed the impact of the license on peer-to-peer users. 
>
>     1) You believe that software is not susceptible to public
>     performance, or if it is, not through the API.
>
>
> No, I believe that lawyers have disagreed upon this issue, right here.
>
>     2) You believe an operator's ability to lock down the data they
>     receive from end users is core to the OSD and to the concept of
>     Free Software.
>
>
> Yes. As the Free Software Foundation and OSI both define things.
>  
>
>     3) You believe that the CAL is too complicated and won't work.
>
>
> I believe that no non-lawyer can understand it without counsel, and
> even then there are issues.
>
>     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/20190510/2f1fc8de/attachment.html>