<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;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Open Sans";
panose-1:2 11 6 6 3 5 4 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@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-GB link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I wasn’t talking about your license, Larry, but instead the license currently being requested for approval.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>IIRC your license was approved quite some time ago, so more appropriate for discussion on the license-discuss, not license-review, list. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>FWIW, I still think these sorts of clauses are unnecessary, although unnecessary clauses aren’t themselves a violation of the OSD (if they were, well, the list would be a lot smaller </span><span style='font-family:"Segoe UI Emoji",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>😊</span><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></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><span lang=EN-US>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US> Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com> <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 8, 2021 2:04 PM<br><b>To:</b> 'McCoy Smith' <mccoy@lexpan.law>; 'License submissions for OSI review' <license-review@lists.opensource.org><br><b>Cc:</b> lrosen@rosenlaw.com<br><b>Subject:</b> RE: [License-review] request for review of the 3D Slicer License<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Thank you, McCoy, for supporting what I said. But it is important to read the rest of the sentence in §15. By its promise, the licensor disclaims any copyright breach claim if the licensee breaks the law. That is a promise, not a condition. It is completely appropriate in a unilateral contract in which only the licensor makes such promises.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Here is how I describe that legal distinction in the <a href="http://rosenlaw.com/OSL3.0-explained.htm">OSL/AFL description</a>:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:black'>As a legal document, OSL 3.0 is drafted as a unilateral contract in which the Licensor makes certain promises and accepts certain obligations. In return, any licensee who accepts and uses the software must honor certain conditions. In a formal sense, in unilateral contracts licensees don't make promises, they merely honor conditions, and so you will find no language in OSL 3.0 to the effect that "licensee promises" anything at all. For example, the obligation to publish source code is an obligation of the Licensor, not a licensee. [§ 3] Reciprocity works indirectly: A licensee's right to distribute Derivative Works is <i>conditioned</i> upon licensing those Derivative Works under the same OSL 3.0 license, whereupon that licensee becomes a Licensor obligated by her own promise to publish Source Code. [§§ 1(c), 3]</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>/Larry</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:8.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US> McCoy Smith <<a href="mailto:mccoy@lexpan.law">mccoy@lexpan.law</a>> <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 8, 2021 11:55 AM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com">lrosen@rosenlaw.com</a>; License submissions for OSI review <<a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [License-review] request for review of the 3D Slicer License<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>The difference being that as an agreement in the license, it is a condition—if breached—that can result in termination or a claim of copyright infringement.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>But Larry’s right these sort of license requirements are surplusage; breaking the law is already, well, illegal.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span lang=EN-US>On Jun 8, 2021, at 10:46 AM, Lawrence Rosen <<a href="mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com">lrosen@rosenlaw.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p></blockquote></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText style='margin-left:.5in'><span lang=EN-US>Pam Chestek wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText style='margin-left:.5in'><span lang=EN-US>I agree that the sentence "You further agree to use, reproduce, make derivative works of, display and distribute the Software in compliance with all applicable governmental laws, regulations and orders, including without limitation those relating to export and import control" is a field of use restriction that we have found unacceptable in the past.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>I don’t agree with this. A requirement to obey “applicable” laws is mandatory for every licensor or licensee who wants to stay out of jail. The government will (may!) enforce this provision. Here is AFL 3.0, section 15:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText style='margin-left:.5in'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;color:#444444;background:#FCFCFC'>15) <b>Right to Use.</b> You may use the Original Work in all ways not otherwise restricted or conditioned by this License or by law, and Licensor promises not to interfere with or be responsible for such uses by You.</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>/Larry<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>-----Original Message-----<br>From: License-review <<a href="mailto:license-review-bounces@lists.opensource.org">license-review-bounces@lists.opensource.org</a>> On Behalf Of Pamela Chestek<br>Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 9:45 PM<br>To: <a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a><br>Subject: Re: [License-review] request for review of the 3D Slicer License<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>On 6/1/2021 1:30 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>> On 5/30/21 2:25 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>>>> If section B was pulled out, I would recommend that this clause <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>>>> should not be an agreement but simply inform the user that such <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>>>> obligations may exist.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>>> Oh, good catch! IIRC we have precedence of not allowing such language <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>>> considering laws differ between places and may change, and because it <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>>> doesn’t belong into a licence anyway.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>> ... also because, given a lot of the crazy laws out there, it may be <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>> impossible to be in compliance with all such laws.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>I agree that the sentence "You further agree to use, reproduce, make derivative works of, display and distribute the Software in compliance with all applicable governmental laws, regulations and orders, including without limitation those relating to export and import control" is a field of use restriction that we have found unacceptable in the past.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>Pam<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>Pamela S. Chestek<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>Chestek Legal<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>PO Box 2492<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>Raleigh, NC 27602<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US><a href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>pamela@chesteklegal.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>+1 919-800-8033<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>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.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>License-review mailing list<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US><a href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>License-review@lists.opensource.org</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US><a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>_______________________________________________<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 opensource.org email address.<br><br>License-review mailing list<br><a href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></blockquote></div></div></body></html>