[License-review] [External] Re: CDDL 1.1

[Warner, Brian (TS3K)]

Hi Pam,

We have a variety of internal rules about licenses and their assessment process, and OSI-approved licenses go through a streamlined process. In this particular case, the license is mainly used in older dependencies and would be straightforward to handle internally as a one-off. But, I figured I'd ask about approval in case it helps other companies with similar "How does OSI feel about it" policies.

Thanks,
Brian

--
Brian Warner
Director, Fidelity Investments OSPO
brian.warner2 at fmr.com<mailto:brian.warner2 at fmr.com>
+1 724-301-6171

________________________________
From: License-review <license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org> on behalf of Pamela Chestek <pamela.chestek at opensource.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2024 2:10 AM
To: license-review at lists.opensource.org <license-review at lists.opensource.org>
Subject: [External] Re: [License-review] CDDL 1.1

NOTICE: This email is from an external sender - do not click on links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.


Brian,

Why do you ask? Do you have a current need for the license to be approved?

Pam

Pamela S. Chestek
Chair, License Committee
Open Source Initiative

On 7/18/2024 1:51 PM, Warner, Brian (TS3K) via License-review wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I searched the list archives and didn't see a submission for CDDL 1.1 (my apologies if I missed it). I know it's been around for quite a while, but if it wasn't submitted in the past would it make sense to add it?
>
> I diffed the text in case it helps. The differences between 1.0 and 1.1 appear to be:
>
> 1. Oracle is the initial license steward, not Sun
> 2. Section 6.3 is new: "If You assert a patent infringement claim against Participant alleging that the Participant Software directly or indirectly infringes any patent where such claim is resolved (such as by license or settlement) prior to the initiation of patent infringement litigation, then the reasonable value of the licenses granted by such Participant under Sections 2.1 or 2.2 shall be taken into account in determining the amount or value of any payment or license."
> 3. Section 7 is changed to remove the words "LOST PROFITS"
> 4. A choice of venue was added: "NOTICE PURSUANT TO SECTION 9 OF THE COMMON DEVELOPMENT AND DISTRIBUTION LICENSE (CDDL)
> The code released under the CDDL shall be governed by the laws of the State of California (excluding conflict-of-law provisions). Any litigation relating to this License shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts of the Northern District of California and the state courts of the State of California, with venue lying in Santa Clara County, California."
>
> Thanks,
> Brian
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.opensource.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flicense-review_lists.opensource.org&data=05%7C02%7Cbrian.warner2%40fmr.com%7Ce680c45bbb75439de0d308dcac70a6a1%7C7521acbca68c41e5a9751cf83066dd19%7C0%7C0%7C638574847044053777%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Tm5CenP7CXwiNukLv%2FsDozYE%2BRQmytlmxe1MlCPakVU%3D&reserved=0<http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org>
--


_______________________________________________
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
https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.opensource.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flicense-review_lists.opensource.org&data=05%7C02%7Cbrian.warner2%40fmr.com%7Ce680c45bbb75439de0d308dcac70a6a1%7C7521acbca68c41e5a9751cf83066dd19%7C0%7C0%7C638574847044061709%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Vhg7P1Xy9zy%2FLPaZ%2B46lRDTqqh%2BULZJ9WFwtuFxIVeg%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/20240725/a6934a15/attachment.htm>