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

Josh Berkus josh at berkus.org
Thu Mar 26 21:14:45 UTC 2020

On 3/26/20 1:53 PM, McCoy Smith wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: License-review <license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org> On

>> I'd actually never heard of either of those licenses before.
> OOSNL is the license just submitted for approval.
> AAL has been on the OSI approved list since September 2002.
> I've attached a compare between the two.  The changes are for the most part grammatical, but for a minor change in the disclaimer, and applying the badging requirement only to binaries.

Wow, we really used to pass just about any kind of garbage if it was in
the right format, didn't we?

My vote:

Reject for OOSNL because of badgeware requirements, subject to
reconsideration should the author include the more flexible complaince
language used by the GPLv3.  There are also other problems with the
license, including the assumption of single authorship, the direct
conflict between clauses (3) and (4), and license proliferation, but the
badgeware requirement is sufficient to kill the first draft.

Forward the AAL for removal from OSI's list of approved licenses to the
Board. It never should have been accepted in the first place.  Raising
an issue on License-Discuss now.

Josh Berkus

More information about the License-review mailing list