[License-review] For Approval: Open Logistics License v1.3 (was v1.2)

Tue Jan 17 22:49:07 UTC 2023

One thing I find curious about this license:
It is designed to be interpreted under German law, but at least in its
intellectual property grants, it is written as if it were to be interpreted
under USA law.

So the copyright grants are the following:
reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform,
and distribute.

Those are the rights granted under US law, 17 USC 106. The German Copyright
Act Sec. 15 et seq. expresses the rights differently.

The patent grants are the following:
produce, have produced, use, offer for sale, sell, import and otherwise
transfer.

This looks more like the grants in German Patent Act Sec. 9, although it’s
more a hybrid of 35 US 271(a) & German Patent Act Sec 9.

Shouldn’t you be using the rights granted under the German Copyright and
Patent Acts instead if you want this to be a Germany specific license?

From: License-review <license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org> On Behalf
Of Andreas Nettsträter
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2023 5:42 AM
To: License submissions for OSI review <license-review at lists.opensource.org>
Subject: Re: [License-review] For Approval: Open Logistics License v1.3 (was
v1.2)

Dear all,

attached you’ll find the updated version of our license.

106

As discussed earlier, we’ve adapted the license name; we have corrected the
parentheses in the first sentence of article 4 and we’ve deleted a paragraph
from article 4. In our view, paragraph 1 of article 4 already ensures the
flow down of the licence and conditions, so that 4.4 is not necessarily
needed. Therefore, we dropped it completely.

Regards

Andreas

Von: License-review < <mailto:license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org>
license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org> Im Auftrag von Andreas
Nettsträter
Gesendet: Freitag, 13. Januar 2023 14:28
An: License submissions for OSI review <
<mailto:license-review at lists.opensource.org>
license-review at lists.opensource.org>
Betreff: Re: [License-review] For Approval: Open Logistics License v1.2

Dear Carlo, all,

thanks for the advice. We already have some ideas to make it more
understandable.

I’ll share an updated version (including some other discussed topics) of the
license within the next days.

Regards

Andreas

Von: License-review < <mailto:license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org>
license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org> Im Auftrag von Carlo Piana
Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Dezember 2022 11:27
An: License submissions for OSI review <
<mailto:license-review at lists.opensource.org>
license-review at lists.opensource.org>
Betreff: Re: [License-review] For Approval: Open Logistics License v1.2

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" <
<mailto:andreas.nettstraeter at openlogisticsfoundation.org>
andreas.nettstraeter at openlogisticsfoundation.org>
A: "License submissions for OSI review" <
<mailto:license-review at lists.opensource.org>
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
<mailto:license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org> > Im Auftrag von Pamela
Chestek
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. Dezember 2022 18:05
An:  <mailto:license-review at lists.opensource.org>
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.cheste
klegal.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7Candreas.nettstraeter%40openlogisticsfoundation.
org%7C557638f3b6bb4821200b08daf56a2618%7Cb346d634acfb42c7bd44f1557ee89b1b%7C
1%7C0%7C638092133503191856%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQI
joiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Hnjr4Yeng9ad
2B0bSZicC2uUbgrgRvn%2FWps0AKkwlIQ%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
 <mailto:License-review at lists.opensource.org>
License-review at lists.opensource.org

<https://deu01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.open
source.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flicense-review_lists.opensource.org&data=0
5%7C01%7Candreas.nettstraeter%40openlogisticsfoundation.org%7C557638f3b6bb48
21200b08daf56a2618%7Cb346d634acfb42c7bd44f1557ee89b1b%7C1%7C0%7C638092133503
191856%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6I
k1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=xmRhW1gmPiEuIxaUtxMI0LS4THxYNTkw
oiQuscRu%2FUY%3D&reserved=0>
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/20230117/2b0ee85a/attachment-0001.html>