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

Wed Jan 22 18:46:19 UTC 2025

Dear License Review List:

At its Board meeting on December 20, 2024, the Board voted on the 
recommendation of the License Review Committee and declined to accept 
the Adversary Public License 1.0 as an OSI-Approved License.

Pamela S. Chestek
Chair, Licensing Committee
Open Source Initiative

On 11/18/2024 8:33 PM, Pamela Chestek wrote:
>
> Dear License-review,
>
> Below is the recommendation of the License Committee that the 
> Adversary Public License not be approved. The Board is scheduled to 
> vote on the license at its next Board meeting.
>
> Pam
>
> Pamela S. Chestek
> Chair, License Committee
> Open Source Initiative
>
> ============
>
> License: Adversary Public License 1.0 (Exhibit A)
> Submitted: September 4, 2024, 
> https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2024-September/005512.html
> Decision date: due no later than the first Board meeting after 
> November 4, 2024
>
> License Review Committee Recommendation:
>
> /Resolved that it is the opinion of the OSI that the Adversary Public 
> License 1.0 does not conform to the OSD and assure software freedom 
> and the license is therefore not approved.//
> //Rationale Document//
> /
> Reasons for withholding approval: The license is the MIT license with 
> seven additional conditions that the license submitter refers to as 
> “tenets from the Temple of Satan 
> <https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2024-September/005512.html>.” 
> When stated and construed as conditions, they make the license 
> impossible to apply and potentially violate several of the elements of 
> the Open Source Definition. As explained by one reviewer 
> <https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2024-September/005514.html>:
>
> If the intended condition is that the recipient of the license must 
> *believe* these tenets in order to obtain a valid license, that's 
> obviously non-free, and should be interpreted as an OSD#5 violation.
>
> If the intended condition is that the recipient may only *use* the 
> software in accordance with these tenets, we run straight into OSD#6 
> problems. For example, one tenet talks about "the freedom to offend". 
> This could be (mis?-)interpreted to forbid the use of the software in 
> an online moderation context. In any case, the tenets are too vague to 
> clearly express what actions are forbidden or required, and that's bad 
> for an Open Source license.
>
> There was some discussion that moving the tenants to a non-operative 
> preamble would correct the deficiency. However, the remainder of the 
> license is the MIT license and, if the license was submitted with the 
> tenants moved to non-operative text, it should be considered redundant 
> and rejected as such.
>
> Exhibit A
> The Adversary Public License
> Copyright <YEAR> <COPYRIGHT HOLDER>
>
> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining 
> a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the 
> “Software”), to deal in the Software without restriction, including 
> without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, 
> distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to 
> permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to 
> the following conditions:
>
> One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all 
> creatures in accordance with reason.
> The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that 
> should prevail over laws and institutions.
> One's body is inviolable, subject to one's own will alone.
> The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to 
> offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of 
> another is to forgo one's own.
> Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the 
> world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit 
> one's beliefs.
> People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best 
> to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused.
> Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in 
> action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice 
> should always prevail over the written or spoken word.
>
> The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be 
> included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
>
> THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, 
> EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF 
> MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. 
> IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY 
> CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, 
> TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE 
> SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
>
> On 9/4/2024 9:45 AM, Ω Alisson wrote:
>> 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
> -- 
> Pamela S. Chestek Chair, License Committee Open Source Initiative
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20250122/eab95255/attachment.htm>