[License-review] For Approval: Open Logistics License v1.2

[Carlo Piana]

Andreas, 

definitely not authoritative, but since I am the one who raised the subject, I feel an obligation to provide a potential solution. 

I would not depart from the common practice of requesting that the recipients of distributed software be notified of the legal language in some form, by including the whole text of the license along the distribution, or by making reference to a canonical online resource, and by requesting an appropriate legal notice. There are plenty of examples out there, all remixing the same concepts and language. See e.g. the GNU *GPLv3. 

All the best, 

Carlo 

> Da: "Andreas Nettsträter" <andreas.nettstraeter at openlogisticsfoundation.org>
> A: "License submissions for OSI review" <license-review at lists.opensource.org>
> Inviato: Venerdì, 23 dicembre 2022 15:01:24
> Oggetto: Re: [License-review] For Approval: Open Logistics License v1.2

> Dear Pam, dear Carlo,

> the last bulletpoint of Article 4 was meant to implement an obligation to flow
> down the obligations of the other bulletpoints of Article 4; if the provision
> requires modification to make this clear, we can make the respective
> amendments.

> How could we formulate it in a better way?

> Regards

> Andreas

> Von: License-review <license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org> Im Auftrag von
> Pamela Chestek
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. Dezember 2022 18:05
> An: license-review at lists.opensource.org
> Betreff: Re: [License-review] For Approval: Open Logistics License v1.2

> On 12/14/2022 4:24 AM, Carlo Piana wrote:

>>> On 12/5/2022 2:45 PM, Carlo Piana wrote:

>>>>> You must ensure that the recipients of the Subject Matter of the License or
>>>>> Derivative Works are obligated to incorporate the provisions of this Section 4
>>>>> into any license under which they distribute the Subject Matter of the License
>>>>> or Derivative Works to any other recipients.

>>>> This provision requires the "You" to a legal effect. As a general remark, this
>>>> is an open ended obligation and IMVHO a bad design decision, since the legal
>>>> effect depends on many different circumstances outside the control of the
>>>> "You", including intent, capacity, errors, lack of proper form etc. You can
>>>> surely include perform an obligation as a condition of the grant, but including
>>>> a legal effect is to me really really seeking for trouble.

>>> Carlo, I'm not following what you're saying. Are you saying that the Licensor
>>> has some liability if the user doesn't actually incorporate the provisions of
>>> Section 4 into their downstream license?

>> Sorry Pam, I have written poorly

>> I meant "This provision requires the "You" to **achieve** a legal effect." The
>> obligation requires that *the recipients** be "obligated". Here it is more of a
>> guarantee, something that you are liable for and not necessarily control, so
>> the risk is on you whatever it happens.

> Thanks, that's very helpful.

> Pam

> Pamela S. Chestek
> Chestek Legal
> PO Box 2492
> Raleigh, NC 27602
> [ mailto:pamela at chesteklegal.com | pamela at chesteklegal.com ]
> (919) 800-8033
> [
> https://deu01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chesteklegal.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7Candreas.nettstraeter%40openlogisticsfoundation.org%7Cf8d1c3a7b6c3497a1b2008daddf56a24%7Cb346d634acfb42c7bd44f1557ee89b1b%7C1%7C0%7C638066343365425048%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=mkOKR7GkzVnwxG4YgGLoaJWmhUlwqS0dOME0E81Qb9Y%3D&reserved=0
> | www.chesteklegal.com ]

> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20221231/b6659261/attachment.html>