[License-review] Approval submission for the Qlovatech License

Quentin Quaadgras email at quentinquaadgras.com
Mon Feb 15 09:17:36 UTC 2021

Pam & Roland,

I respect the time and attention of the members of this mailing list, 
It is not my intention to use this as a workshop or educational forum. 
I am not seeking advice on how to write the license. My goals are to review 
and seek Open Source Initiative approval of the license and by extension, 
ensure it is in line with the Open Source definition.

I included the revision, as an attempt to clarify the license objectively
so that reviewers could better understand the context, principles and 
purpose of the license. However, I can understand how this sort of revision is
unmanageable (it may be worth noting this in the submission material).

Roland, regarding your notes. I wouldn't want to wait for any material 
ongoing harm before licensing a project, as by then it would be too late. 
I believe that the Open Source space is better served when the licenses are
future proofed and can proactively protect those projects from 
any potential harms (whether or not they are realistic today). 
Not all Open Source project names can be legally recognized as a trademark 
because normally a trademark is used to refer to products and services and 
therefore a freely available project may have any protection.

Regarding license proliferation more specifically, there isn't an alternative license that:

  * meets the Open Source definition, and
  * is copy-left at the project-level, and
  * triggers copy-left when used in a service, public display or performance, and
  * has builtin protections for the name and/or brand of the project, and any forks, and
  * allows relicensing under a chosen open-source license upon the written 
     agreement between any contributor who wants to opt-in to become 
     stakeholders in this choice and agreement.

I don't believe that using any existing licenses with additional terms will cut it, 
small developers who want to Open Source their projects are often not in
the position to correctly write additional terms and are looking for a
ready-made license available to protect their projects. 

In any case, I no longer believe the submitted license is fit for approval and I
would like to formally withdraw my approval submission for the Qlovatech License.


More information about the License-review mailing list