<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap:break-word" vlink="purple" link="blue"
lang="EN-US">
Forwarding to license-review. I asked a question specifically about
the interpretation of a sentence in a license that is pending
review. I would like the opportunity for others to provide input if
they like and a number of people on this list don't read
license-discuss.<br>
<br>
McCoy asked Larry to discuss his OWN license on license-discuss. I
agree with that. But this question was about the 3D Slicer License,
not Larry's license.<br>
<br>
Pam<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">Pamela S. Chestek<br>
Chestek Legal<br>
PO Box 2492<br>
Raleigh, NC 27602<br>
919-800-8033<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.chesteklegal.com">www.chesteklegal.com</a><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-forward-container"><br>
<br>
-------- Forwarded Message --------
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" cellspacing="0"
cellpadding="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">Subject:
</th>
<td>Re: [License-discuss] [License-review] request for
review of the 3D Slicer License</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">Date: </th>
<td>Wed, 9 Jun 2021 08:40:45 -0700</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">From: </th>
<td>Lawrence Rosen <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com"><lrosen@rosenlaw.com></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">Reply-To:
</th>
<td><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com">lrosen@rosenlaw.com</a>,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:license-discuss@lists.opensource.org">license-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">To: </th>
<td><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:license-discuss@lists.opensource.org">license-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style>@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:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}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;}pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}p.gmail-m438978589280261809msoplaintext, li.gmail-m438978589280261809msoplaintext, div.gmail-m438978589280261809msoplaintext
{mso-style-name:gmail-m_438978589280261809msoplaintext;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
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;}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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">[Returning this to license-discuss@]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Pam, you are misreading my response. If the
word “agree” turns this license into a bilateral license, even
then the provision is enforceable and the license is contrary
to the OSD, just as a “you agree not to export contrary to US
law” provision is unfortunate with the OSD but nevertheless
enforceable in the US. Whether a court will call it a
“condition on the copyright grant” is something that lawyers
like you will argue about incessantly to no avail until the
judge speaks. (Do you remember the nonsense about the Artistic
license and its “conditions” where the court had to search
hard to find some condition not explicitly called a condition
it could enforce?)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">You seem to take
the view that it's not a condition. I was asking you to parse
the language in the 3D Slicer license to explain how you
reached that legal conclusion.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I said no such thing. There are issues more
important, such as the unfortunate formation of a bilateral
contract. But if you forced me to take a position in a brief
to the court (depending on who my client might be!), I would
argue that an “agreement” by the licensee is an enforceable
condition precedent (“don’t violate or the license won’t take
effect”) or condition subsequent (“don’t violate or the
license terminates”) simply because the licensee agreed to it.
Does it matter *<b>when</b>* the condition is breached?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There are various reasons I have largely
ignored license submissions on this site in recent years. One,
I am largely retired from the actual practice of law. Second,
I am frustrated at the continuous efforts by software vendors
to find yet another way to say the same thing about the use of
their software so that licensees and you can quibble forever
about it. Third, I see nothing important in the 3D Slicer
License that would make me worry about using that software as
open source *<b>in conformity with US law</b>*. And finally,
many years ago I wrote several licenses whose words are
continually ignored by the “experts” on this list as if they
don’t matter to anyone because there is some subtle and unique
“condition” that I perhaps forgot at the time. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It is all a waste of energy and a
continuing puzzle imposed on the use of open source software
probably because people on this list find such arguments fun.
But I don’t.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">For what it may be worth, I will repeat
what I said below: “License drafting is not a job for the
amateur.” I’m sure you feel the same way about trademarks!<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">/Larry<span style="font-size:8.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> License-review
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:license-review-bounces@lists.opensource.org"><license-review-bounces@lists.opensource.org></a> <b>On
Behalf Of </b>Pamela Chestek<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, June 9, 2021 6:31 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> License submissions for OSI review
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" 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></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Larry,<br>
<br>
You've misunderstood my question. No one questioned that the
term is enforceable or that the licensee has agreed to it. The
question was whether the phrase in the 3D license is a
condition on the copyright grant or not. If it is a condition,
then the copyright license terminates on a licensee's failure
to act lawfully, which, as you agree, is a violation of OSD 6.
You seem to take the view that it's not a condition. I was
asking you to parse the language in the 3D Slicer license to
explain how you reached that legal conclusion.<br>
<br>
Pam<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Pamela S.
Chestek<br>
Chestek Legal<br>
PO Box 2492<br>
Raleigh, NC 27602<br>
919-800-8033<br>
<a href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.chesteklegal.com" moz-do-not-send="true">www.chesteklegal.com</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 6/8/2021 9:02 PM, Lawrence Rosen
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi Pam, I’m moving this to
license-discuss@.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">If you believe
that the language in the 3D Slicer license doesn't terminate
the license I'd be interested in hearing how you parse the
sentence. For your reference, the sentence is: "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."<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As I tried to make clear in my own
licenses, I don’t believe it is appropriate to require a
licensee “to agree” to anything in “a unilateral contract”.
Perhaps that is too subtle for this list, but I believe
there is legal authority for that difference from “a
bilateral contract” in which both parties accept
obligations. I was very careful in my drafting.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is a legal distinction from “a
condition” that must be met by every licensee. Please review
the legal distinction between “unilateral” and “bilateral”
contracts. (Google is helpful here!)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So since the 3D Slicer license requires
an agreement from the licensee, that turns this into a
bilateral contract. I agree with others on this list,
including you, that requiring a licensee to agree to honor
the law goes beyond the open source definition. On the other
hand (since every lawyer has two hands!) a failure to obey
the law can result in legal penalties, not from the licensor
but from the government. I do not believe it is
inappropriate for OSI, and individual licenses, to remind
licensees about that. It doesn’t hurt to do so. As McCoy
suggests, it is probably surplusage.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We tackled this problem at OSI years ago
in the context of export restrictions in US law. Several
drafters attempted to insert an “export” provision in their
licenses, which OSI rejected. But a licensee’s rights to
certain software may be withdrawn by the government if they
attempt to export in contravention to that law. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As for what Thai law mandates or
prohibits, I say nothing.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">License drafting is not a job for the
amateur.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">/Larry<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> License-review <a
href="mailto:license-review-bounces@lists.opensource.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"><license-review-bounces@lists.opensource.org></a>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Pamela Chestek<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 8, 2021 4:22 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a
href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">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></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Larry,<br>
<br>
As others have pointed out, there's a difference between my
duty to comply with laws, in which case compliance with
those laws may mean I am not at liberty to exercise the
license granted to me, and whether or not the license to me
terminates because I failed in a duty not to break the law.
It is the latter situation that is a violation of OSD6 and
the objection to the license under review. <br>
<br>
If you believe that the language in the 3D Slicer license
doesn't terminate the license I'd be interested in hearing
how you parse the sentence. For your reference, the sentence
is: "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."<br>
<br>
Pam<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Pamela S. Chestek<br>
Chestek Legal<br>
PO Box 2492<br>
Raleigh, NC 27602<br>
919-800-8033<br>
<a href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.chesteklegal.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.chesteklegal.com</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
On 6/8/2021 4:49 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">Simon, I’ve never been to Thailand nor
reviewed its software laws. But in the US, if you
distribute open source software that violates the export
law of the US, you could go to jail. “Open source” is
irrelevant. Copyright law is irrelevant. /Larry<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Lawrence Rosen<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:8.0pt">707-478-8932</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:8.0pt">3001 King
Ranch Rd., Ukiah, CA 95482</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:8.0pt"><a
href="mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:#0563C1">lrosen@rosenlaw.com</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:8.0pt">LinkedIn:
Lawrence Rosen</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Simon Phipps <a
href="mailto:simon@webmink.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><simon@webmink.com></a>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 8, 2021 12:04 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Lawrence Rosen <a
href="mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><lrosen@rosenlaw.com></a>;
License submissions for OSI review <a
href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"><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></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 6:46 PM
Lawrence Rosen <<a
href="mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">lrosen@rosenlaw.com</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-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="gmail-m438978589280261809msoplaintext"
style="margin-left:.5in">Here is AFL 3.0,
section 15:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="gmail-m438978589280261809msoplaintext"
style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:10.5pt">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><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Please help me understand this.
If I were in Thailand and used AFL 3.0 licensed
software to publish a call for a republic, would I
be in breach of the author's copyright as well as in
breach of their <i>lese majeste</i> laws? <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">S.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>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></pre>
<pre> <o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>License-review mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org" moz-do-not-send="true">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><o:p> </o:p></pre>
<pre>License-discuss mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href="mailto:License-discuss@lists.opensource.org" moz-do-not-send="true">License-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>