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

[Aaron Williamson]

Having recently read through a large number of licenses on the OSI approved
license list, I feel compelled to correct this:

On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 1:31 PM Bradley M. Kuhn <bkuhn at ebb.org> wrote:

>  * 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.
>

Here is a probably incomplete list of other OSI-approved licenses with some
version of a choice-of-law clause:

   - CeCILL Free Software License Agreement v2.0 (
   https://github.com/spdx/license-list-data/blob/main/text/CECILL-2.0.txt)
   - IBM Public License Version 1.0 (https://opensource.org/licenses/IPL-1.0
   )
   - Licence Libre du Québec – Réciprocité forte version 1.1 (
   https://opensource.org/licenses/LiLiQ-Rplus-1.1)
   - Lucent Public License Version 1.0 (
   https://opensource.org/licenses/LPL-1.0)
   - Open Software License - all versions (e.g.
   https://opensource.org/licenses/OSL-3.0)
   - RealNetworks Public Source License Version 1.0 (
   https://opensource.org/licenses/RPSL-1.0)
   - Reciprocal Public License 1.5 (https://opensource.org/licenses/RPL-1.5)

As far as I know, the inclusion of a choice-of-law clause has never been
considered inconsistent with the OSD (though FSF considers them
incompatible with the GPL).

Aaron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20221213/290d0e21/attachment.html>