<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
h2
{mso-style-priority:9;
mso-style-link:"Heading 2 Char";
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:18.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
font-weight:bold;}
h5
{mso-style-priority:9;
mso-style-link:"Heading 5 Char";
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
font-weight:bold;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.Heading2Char
{mso-style-name:"Heading 2 Char";
mso-style-priority:9;
mso-style-link:"Heading 2";
font-family:"Calibri Light",sans-serif;
color:#2F5496;}
span.Heading5Char
{mso-style-name:"Heading 5 Char";
mso-style-priority:9;
mso-style-link:"Heading 5";
font-family:"Calibri Light",sans-serif;
color:#2F5496;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>So by your formulation, the grant of “use” is limited to commercial purposes.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>If so, it violates the OSD.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>You seem to think the license is entirely clear and doesn’t need any revision. That, of course, is your right, and you can request OSI approval as-is. I’d suggest that you might want to consider improving the language (portions of which are also non-idomatic), but you don’t have to listen to me, to any other commentor on this message board, the OSD, or the OSI Board for that matter. Perhaps you should suggest that OSI not accept comments on your draft, since you have determined it is unquestionably clear and OSD-conformant, and just do the Board vote on approval now. It might save everyone some time.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Andrew Nassief <kamalandrew55@gmail.com> <br><b>Sent:</b> Saturday, December 26, 2020 7:36 AM<br><b>To:</b> mccoy@lexpan.law; License submissions for OSI review <license-review@lists.opensource.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [License-review] Approval: OIN License (Open Innovation License)<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Hi in regards to your key points. I want to emphasize each one, one by one:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The license agreement clearly states:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>This means any code, file, diagrams, data format, or other innovation containing this license within it can be copied, modified, redistributed, published, or even used for commercial purposes within the context of this license.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The context is "or even used for commercial purposes". "Or" grammatically separates the rest of the items from the list. It also emphasized it can be copied, modified, redistributed, published, etc. Saying "or even used" is different then "and only used", and "or even used" is the same thing as "or used". This simply just puts a non-restrictive clause on commercial usage of the technology, but it obviously doesn't imply restrictive clauses on open source usage or redistribution. This makes the license within the rules and standards of OSD.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Also I clearly indicate in the last paragraph of the agreement:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Said agreement which is within the last paragraph prior to this sentence is meant to be taken as a general consensus, but not legally enforceable. Again for context, the last paragraph which starts with "Anybody" and ends with "human mind" minus quotations, is outside of the boundaries of being legally enforceable and within the duties of oneselve's actions. The rest of the license which includes the copyright notice and its context is within a legally enforceable context. For secondary context, the rest of the license refers to anything outside of that said paragraph.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>This is because mission statements are ambiguous and not legally binding, however violating an open source license is a form of IP or copyright infringement to an extent. The whole document is to be looked at as a whole, henceforth the legal applicability and the non-bindingness of the mission statement still applies. There are also other permissive licenses such as WTFPL that I would argue are perhaps more legally ambiguous in language.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The only other inquiry you have is that OIN may accidentally suggest affiliation with Open Innovation Network. The term open innovation is used alot in technology and the Open Innovation Network is not considered an open source license. I was originally going to be using OIL as an acronym, but I think it may present unwarranted liabilities making an acronym for a license after a commodity. Also I was going to adapt OINN, but I didn't see a need to have two Ns. Since there are actually no license agreements using OIN as an acronym, I still think it should be fine. The Open Innovation Network acquires patents and licenses them as royalty free as long as people who use them don't agree to make patents against Linux Systems (See <a href="http://xml.coverpages.org/OIN-Announce.html">http://xml.coverpages.org/OIN-Announce.html</a>). If we were going to be using the same logic on acronyms one can say that the COPL license might have people confused w/ Concurrency Oriented Programming Languages or that NTP may be affiliated with New Trade Policy or India's New Telecom Policy or Nordic Innovation's NTP program. Outside of specific license acronyms like ZLIB, the same can be said about other licenses. Since OIN isn't an open source license identifier currently, I still want to proceed with it as an acronym and think for simplicity's sake it should be fine for now.<o:p></o:p></p><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=3 cellpadding=0><tr><td style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'></td><td style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'></td></tr></table></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 10:02 AM McCoy Smith <<a href="mailto:mccoy@lexpan.law">mccoy@lexpan.law</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>This one probably needs some careful legal and grammatical review as it is very awkwardly drafted and potentially confusing/legally ambiguous. Its current draft is probably not approvable.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>The grant itself is drafted in a way that could be read to restrict the license to only commercial uses, which obviously would violate the OSD.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>The context statement could also be read as a legally binding restriction on the license grant (the use of “agree” is mainly the problem), although it seems the intent is *<b>not</b>* to have those statements to be legally binding but instead merely suggestions. I’m not sure the language used accomplishes that goal.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>The interesting issue this license raises is whether legally non-binding statements that would, if legally binding, violate the OSD, can nevertheless satisfy the OSD. I tend to think if they are drafted in a way that they are unambiguously non-legally binding, they probably would be, but it does present an interesting test of the OSD and I suspect once a license of that sort is approved, you will likely have many submissions of licenses with non-legally binding statements of ethical principles following.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>I’d also suggest the use of “OIN” as the shorthand name of the license is likely a problem and it would likely suggest an affiliation with the Open Invention Network, which I’m pretty sure this license isn’t.<o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt;border-color:currentcolor currentcolor currentcolor blue'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in;border-color:currentcolor currentcolor'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><b>From:</b> License-review <<a href="mailto:license-review-bounces@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">license-review-bounces@lists.opensource.org</a>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Andrew Nassief<br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, December 25, 2020 4:50 PM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> [License-review] Approval: OIN License (Open Innovation License)<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Hi, I would like to submit my license for approval. The LICENSE.md file can be seen on <a href="https://github.com/StarkDrones/OIN/blob/main/LICENSE.md" target="_blank">GitHub</a> with its available markdown. For sake of simplicity, here is the raw text of the license:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><h2><strong><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Released under the Open Innovation License</span></strong><o:p></o:p></h2><p>Copyright © // Insert information of license holder<o:p></o:p></p><p><em><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Version 1, 10th November 2020</span></em><o:p></o:p></p><p><em><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Copyright © 2020 Stark Drones Corporation</span></em><br><em><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Copyright © 2020 Andrew Magdy Kamal</span></em><o:p></o:p></p><p>This project is licensed under the <em><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Open Innovation License</span></em>. This means any code, file, diagrams, data format, or other innovation containing this license within it can be copied, modified, redistributed, published, or even used for commercial purposes within the context of this license.<o:p></o:p></p><h5>Any code, file, diagrams, data format, or other innovation containing this license is understood to be fully "AS IS", no claims are made in regards to safety, security, warranty, usability, or other form of merchantability and market-readiness. In no events are copyright holders, authors, or publishers are to be held liable for any claims, damage or results from usage of what have been licensed under this license.<o:p></o:p></h5><p>The context of this license includes: Keeping this original license text verbatim and permissive notice, as well as the copyright notice included in any redistribution of said project. Project is defined as what is using this license. For purposes of context, the copyright notice above version and year is meant to be modified for whomsoever publishes or releases "any code, file, diagrams, data format, or other innovation", so that they can include their information. After modifying, the comment saying "// Insert information of license holder" which starts with // can be removed. This current paragraph however, will remain in-tact.<o:p></o:p></p><p>Anybody who releases software under the "Open Innovation License" agrees to at goodwill, build or release technology for the betterment of humanity not meant with the intention to harm a human being. They agree to a prima facie moral duty through consequential deontology to understand that technology should be within the concept of moral good or outcomes that are morally right and/or ethical. They agree at goodwill to promote the advancement of humanity and civilization as a whole. They agree to a sense of adventurement, edification, and the expansion of the human mind.<o:p></o:p></p><p>Said agreement which is within the last paragraph prior to this sentence is meant to be taken as a general consensus, but not legally enforceable. Again for context, the last paragraph which starts with "Anybody" and ends with "human mind" minus quotations, is outside of the boundaries of being legally enforceable and within the duties of oneselve's actions. The rest of the license which includes the copyright notice and its context is within a legally enforceable context. For secondary context, the rest of the license refers to anything outside of that said paragraph.<o:p></o:p></p><p>____<o:p></o:p></p><p><em><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Rationale:</span></em><o:p></o:p></p><p>I wanted to release this license for a variety of different reasons. Infact, I made many posts in regards to why this license is unique and valuable, and found many developers willing to adapt this license through small innovation challenges. The license was made on the basis of promoting a mission statement on ethical technology within the license as well as not being specific to only software i.e. files, diagrams, data format or any other innovation. <o:p></o:p></p><p>We also wanted to make sure that the license is adaptable. Many open source licenses require you to put tons of header files for compliance. We wanted to make a license that just requires you to contain the license file in your directory. While many other open source licenses also do that or follow in similar footsteps, we weren't able to find one that met all these unique qualities.<o:p></o:p></p><p>Currently, a big inspiration for this license was the idea of promoting free and open software as well as a mission statement on ethical technologies. We found that many of the big tech companies that are hailed as heroes of open source or doing open source initiatives, built technologies that are harmful to human activity. A technically non-legally enforceable mission statement within an enforceable open source license was the way to go. We also made sure to go out of our way to promote the ideals of open source and free and redistributive software.<o:p></o:p></p><p><em><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Distinguish:</span></em><o:p></o:p></p><p>I looked at a variety of different open source licenses. The standard being MIT, then BSD+Patent, ZLib, CDDL, CPAL, CPL, CAL, BSL, and the AFL license. I feel like MIT, ZLIB, and the Boost licenses focus on redistribution and code. Those are the standards. The open patent licenses and other licenses focus on derived original work. However, none of them tried going to the same extent I wanted in terms of being specific in regards to data formats or general consensus and mission. I believe this is an important thing to take into account.<o:p></o:p></p><p><em><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Legal review:</span></em><o:p></o:p></p><p>Currently I have submitted this to SPDX as well for review through their GitHub/Website. However, the review time to get approval and receive SPDX identifiers can be many months. I submitted in November and decided to submit to OSI while I wait. As for reviewing the context of language myself and actual legal review, I have thought out reviews through my own legal council and self judgement as a researcher familiar with these types of languages.<o:p></o:p></p><p><em><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Proliferation category:</span></em> <o:p></o:p></p><p>I don't necessarily need to be in a Proliferation category as of now, as many of the licenses on your site are not in a category. However, I would eventually want to get into the <i>Licenses that are popular and widely used or with strong communities </i>category.<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________<br>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 <a href="http://opensource.org" target="_blank">opensource.org</a> email address.<br><br>License-review mailing list<br><a href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><br clear=all><br>-- <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Andrew Magdy Kamal<br><a href="http://andsocialrew.wall.fm" target="_blank">http://andsocialrew.wall.fm</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>