[License-review] Fwd: For Approval | Open Source Social Network License 1.0

McCoy Smith mccoy at lexpan.law
Thu Mar 26 15:00:38 UTC 2020


From: License-review <license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org> On Behalf Of Lukas Atkinson
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 7:00 AM
To: License submissions for OSI review <license-review at lists.opensource.org>
Subject: Re: [License-review] Fwd: For Approval | Open Source Social Network License 1.0


However, I think approval of the AAL might have been a mistake, and that approval for similar licenses should be withheld.


This license is a very good test case of a couple of propositions that have been floating around in various threads (or Board candidacy platforms) over the past year or so:


a.	Are badgeware licenses approvable by OSI now?  If not, on what basis (violation of OSD, violation of other rules or concerns, combination of both)?
b.	If there are currently approved licenses on the OSI list that either in the past, or now, violate the rules for OSI-approval, what ought to be done with them?
c.	Is it fair to deny approval of a license when there is precedent in an already-approved license for the same feature or concept in a newly-submitted license?


Those issues have been kicked around with regard to various licenses on license-approval in the past, and on license-discuss in general, but I still believe getting resolution on those questions (and documenting the resolution for future submitters to understand prior to their license submission) would be valuable and would guide submitters like those for the OSSNLv1.0.


This particular submission, IMHO, represents an ideal scenario for resolving some or all of those questions, and I’d suggest OSI take the opportunity now to do so.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20200326/f1427a29/attachment.html>

More information about the License-review mailing list