[License-review] Questions About Compliance with OSD
Kevin P. Fleming
kevin+osi at km6g.us
Tue Mar 22 22:47:54 UTC 2022
While that is your intent, if you provide six different options for a
licensor to select, that means that there are six different versions
of this license. If any one of those versions is deemed incompatible
with the OSD, and thus can't be marked 'approved' by the OSI, then
none of them can be, because they are all named the same thing.
Other license families which offer options of this type have different
names for each variation: for example the LILIQ license family has
"P', "R" and "R+" versions.
With the license text you have provided a licensor could choose the
'no commercial usage' restriction but still try to claim that their
software is licensed under an OSI-approved license if the approval was
granted to the license family by a single name, and that's not
appropriate. If you want the license to be considered for OSI
approval, every combination of choices that a licensor is offered must
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 6:41 PM 决策组 <yateam at foxmail.com> wrote:
> Sir or Madam, the first thing we need to confirm is that we have verified in many ways that the Chinese and English meanings are the same. On the issue of Restrictions, in fact, this is just a word. It is essentially the same as the requirements of other licenses. We just provide a right of choice.
> For example, Apache supports commercial use, while GPL has restrictions on commercial use. We only provide the option to solve the problem within one license.
> 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
More information about the License-review