[License-review] New License for review: ADVPL 1.0

[Ω Alisson]

The conditions having nothing to do with software is debatable. There are
examples like the JSON License <https://www.json.org/license.html> (The
Software shall be used for Good, not Evil), the Hippocratic License
<https://firstdonoharm.dev/> (probably not OSI-compliant, but in the same
ethical vein).

By the License Review Process, is lawyer consultancy obligatory or just the
mentioning of it?


On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 12:58 PM Carlo Piana <carlo at piana.eu> wrote:

> Dear Alisson,
>
> you purport to have added "conditions", but in fact you have added general
> aspirational staments which technically do not consist of conditions.
> Therefore, the grant is conditioned to conditions which are not conditions
> and that have nothing to do with the interaction with software. At best, it
> is matter that would belong in a preamble. Please consider this as a
> technical remark, not as a remark on the principles (with which I seem to
> agree, but it's immaterial).
>
> In addition, I think this submission does not fully comply with the
> submission guidelines. I doubt a lawyer has laid their eyes on this text
> and I can't find any such indication.
>
> The conclusion IMHO should be "rejection".
>
> With best regards,
>
> Carlo (in his own personal capacity)
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *Da: *"Ω Alisson" <thelinuxlich at gmail.com>
> *A: *"license-review at lists.opensource.org" <
> license-review at lists.opensource.org>
> *Inviato: *Mercoledì, 4 settembre 2024 18:45:50
> *Oggetto: *[License-review] New License for review: ADVPL 1.0
>
> In accordance with the License Review Process
> <http://opensource.org/approval>, I'd like to submit for review the
> Adversary Public License 1.0 (ADVPL), which is composed of the MIT license
> text + 7 tenets from the Temple of Satan. It complies with all terms of
> the Open Source Definition, the suggested tag is ADVPL. Currently no
> significant projects use it, although there is intent once it's approved.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20240905/76e0beb0/attachment.htm>