[License-review] Final comment on Open Logistics License (was Re: For Approval: Open Logistics License v1.2)

[Pamela Chestek]

I have learned from past experience that how the license review process 
works isn't very clear, so I want to clarify for Andreas and others how 
it works.

Bradley has responded in a way that suggests that there some kind of 
formal vote and I want to clarify that's not the case. Participation is 
open to everyone and anyone, you just have to be on the mailing list. 
Those interested engage in discussion about the license. We rely on the 
participants to raise concerns about the license and I may also raise my 
own. I observe and participate in the conversation, looking for 
consensus on whether the license should be approved. The OSI will make a 
decision on a license in no less that 60 days after its submitted, but 
it may take longer if there is a lot of discussion about the license.

I understand that it's hard for the license submitter to know who to 
respond to, and they wonder whether some commenters have more clout than 
others. The license submitter should answer all questions directed at 
them and defend challenges that the license doesn't meet the OSD. 
"Clout" is based on the the knowledge and thought demonstrated by the 
commenter - if someone's criticisms are not well-supported and on topic, 
their opinion will have less weight. That's simply a function of the 
fact that unsupported criticisms just aren't helpful in reaching a 
conclusion.

Once there is consensus, the license committee prepares a rationale 
document. The rationale document discusses the issues raised in the 
discussion and why the license committee thought the issues raised were 
(or were not) valid. The rationale document gets published to the 
license-review list and submitted to the Board. The Board then votes 
whether to accept the recommendation of the License Committee at its 
next Board meeting. We then inform the license-review list of the decision.

Pam

Pamela Chestek
Chair, License Committee
Open Source Initiative

On 12/13/2022 1:29 PM, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
> My final comments that are on-topic for license-review regarding the “Open
> Logistics License”.
>
> I ask OSI's Board to REJECT acceptance of “Open Logistics License” as an
> OSI-approved Open Source License for the following two reasons:
>
>   * It has a “choice of law” clause for Germany.  This is unprecedented
>     because — after changes in recent years to in EPL and MPL — no other
>     licenses on OSI-approved list have a “choice of law” of Germany
>     specifically, and it seems the only active precedents for a “choice of
>     law” clause permanently nailed to a single jurisdiction (rather than
>     “jurisdiction of the Licensor”-style “choice of law”) is the Qt License,
>     which is a deprecated vanity license.
>
>   * The name “Open Logistics License” is confusing, and may lead OSI's
>     license users to believe this is a recommended license for all activity
>     in the “open logistics” field of endeavor.
>
>     “Open logistics” is a generic term that seems to have something to do
>     with “open source”.  Specifically, I am concerned that it might confuse
>     the community that if you are doing “open logistics” of any kind, that,
>     if approved, users of the license list will assume that the “Open
>     Logistics License” is considered by OSI as the preferred license for that
>     activity.  (By contrast, no one is confused to think that if you're
>     writing software to study eclipses that OSI prefers the EPL.)
>
> As a separate matter, I ask OSI's Board at their next meeting under
> <https://opensource.org/approval> to (re)consider various proposals that
> were reiterated in this discussion (a) a license approval appeals court
> system, and (b) a process for delisting that can be initiated by an entity
> or individual other than the license steward.  See:
> https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2022-December/022041.html
>     
>
> [ Fontana and I have moved further replies on Eric Schultz's sub-thread to
>    license-discuss per Pam's request.  Note that Pam had a address typo in
>    her reply so, her email didn't show up on license-discuss. ]
>
>   -- bkuhn
>
> _______________________________________________
> The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Communication from the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
>
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org