[License-review] veto against Unlicence

Pamela Chestek pamela at chesteklegal.com
Fri May 15 13:32:52 UTC 2020

On 5/15/2020 9:27 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 1:34 PM Langley, Stuart
> <Stuart.Langley at disney.com <mailto:Stuart.Langley at disney.com>> wrote:
>     The issue this creates is that the author can’t make a valid
>     transfer to the public domain.  Transfers are not allowed.  The
>     author’s completely clear and unambiguous intent to transfer does
>     not change that. The only option is to license sufficient rights. 
>     Without a license, even if the author does not assert copyright,
>     their heirs might.
> OSI has previously advised that "public domain" does not qualify as
> open source because exactly this sort of issue, varying in scope and
> consequence globally, prevents developers from being sure they have
> the necessary rights without consulting another person first.
> See https://opensource.org/node/878
The difference with the Unlicense is that it /also/ clearly states what
rights are granted. Does that not resolve any concern with the Unlicense?


Pamela S. Chestek
Chestek Legal
PO Box 2492
Raleigh, NC 27602
pamela at chesteklegal.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20200515/abe42d52/attachment.html>

More information about the License-review mailing list