<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/06/2016 03:00, TENG Fei wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:HK2PR03MB17311EB14D7F604E260B55F9B6560@HK2PR03MB1731.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div><span></span></div>
<div>
<div><span></span></div>
<div>
<div><span></span></div>
<div>
<div>Dear License Review Board, </div>
<div>
<pre style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">
</pre>
</div>
<div>I am writing to request the approval of <span
style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">
ZENTAO PUBLIC LICENSE. The required information is as
followed.</span></div>
<div><font style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br>
</font></div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
While I still don't like this license at all, I can only spot a few
flaws now:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
QingDao Nature Easy <br>
Soft Network Technology Co,LTD has the final authority to
interpret the <br>
terms of the agreement. </blockquote>
<br>
This is quite strange. A Judge should have this final authority.
Relying on an external source for defining the legal content of a
license is heterodox at best. The license must be self-fulfilling
(except for the inevitable external legal environment).<br>
<br>
Additionally, the reference to "I" looks suspicious: who is this
"I"? Who is this "I" for downstream modifications? Are downstream
copyright holders excluded from the same rights as the original? <br>
<br>
I also have reservations, which I think I have already expressed,
against <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">4.4 You must notify your users clearly that
your service is based on the software
<br>
when you use it to build your online service.</blockquote>
<br>
although it seems better worded than what my memory reports.<br>
<br>
Finally, there is a list of "things" a user/developer can do. I am
sure there has been effort in be all-inclusive, but is it the
complete list or something outside would be permissible? Some read
as very specific to a given field-of-use, while other fields of use
can be discriminated.<br>
<br>
All in all, a further case for upholding the advice "don't write a
license unless it's strictly necessary; most often it's not
necessary; it's almost invariably a bad idea".<br>
<br>
Best<br>
<br>
Carlo<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>