<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi Richard,<div><br></div><div>Excellent feedback and questions. Thanks! Responses inline...</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Howard</div><div><div>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><br></div></div></span></div></span></span></div><div><div>On Oct 6, 2013, at 1:16 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Sat, 5 Oct 2013 11:58:36 -0700<br>Howard Look <<a href="mailto:howard@tidepool.org">howard@tidepool.org</a>> wrote:<br><br><blockquote type="cite">My name is Howard Look. I am President/CEO of Tidepool Project. We<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">are a non-profit, (soon to be) open source project creating an open<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">platform and applications to help reduce the burden on people with<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Type 1 Diabetes. We are proposing that we a new create a new license,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the Tidepool Open Access to Health Data Software License.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Our company and efforts are described here:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://tidepool.org">http://tidepool.org</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Our rationale and proposed license strategy is detailed here: <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://tidepool.org/blog/2013/9/17/wheres-the-code-or-a-funny-thing-happened-while-on-the-way-to-an-open-source-license">http://tidepool.org/blog/2013/9/17/wheres-the-code-or-a-funny-thing-happened-while-on-the-way-to-an-open-source-license</a><br></blockquote><br>While the license strategy specific to your software might seem to be<br>irrelevant to the question of whether the license itself is 'Open<br>Source' or not, I have a few questions about it which I hope you will<br>entertain. <br><br>Given that you have decided to dual-license your software under GPLv3<br>(an OSI-approved license) and this new license, why are you seeking OSI<br>approval for the new license? After all, given your chosen<br>dual-licensing approach, your software will be Open Source by<br>definition. If it's so important to you to have this new license be<br>OSI-approved, why not just plan to use a single-license approach,<br>especially since you seem to concede that few if any users are likely<br>to take you up on the GPLv3 option?<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div>The single-license approach is definitely an option for us. If we were to</div><div>go that way, I'd want to know that the one license we chose was OSI</div><div>compliant. <br><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>On that point, your blog post makes much of the anticipated commercial<br>resistance to the GPL. Do you then believe that this new license is<br>likely to be significantly more commercially palatable than the GPL?<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div>That's a good question. I have at least one conversation this week with</div><div>Medtronic (the largest device maker in our space) to see what they think</div><div>about the Tidepool license (I presume they won't touch GPL, but I will</div><div>find out that for sure, as well).</div><div><br></div><div>I have gotten feedback from two other commercial entities</div><div>(one small, one very large) that they'd rather we just use a well-known</div><div>permissive license like MIT, BSD or Apache. But that does accomplish</div><div>our "open access to data" desire.</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div>Your blog post seems in part to be a response to questions about why<br>you have thus far kept your code private. You suggest that you have held<br>off on making your software public while "figur[ing] out the right open<br>source license to use". I can understand why you might wish to delay<br>use of the new license because feedback here and elsewhere might reveal<br>some remaining problems with the license text. But if you have decided<br>on this dual-license approach, why then wouldn't you just release your<br>software under GPLv3 immediately, and add the other license at some<br>later date?<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Excellent question. One reason is that we've gotten feedback that the</div><div>dual-license approach is falling out of favor, and my hope was they we could</div><div>"get it right" out of the gate. I've also gotten feedback that offering a dual license</div><div>creates more uncertainty than it is worth.</div><div><br></div><div>But you are correct, releasing under GPL and adding another license later</div><div>when we've figured out the right permissive license is indeed an valid and</div><div>important option that we should consider.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks!</div><div>Howard</div><div><br></div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>- RF<br><br><br><br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>