<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>The license review process requires several things which it
      doesn't look like you've done here, which includes the following:</p>
    <p>"Describe any legal review the license has been through,
      including whether it was drafted by a lawyer."</p>
    <p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process">https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process</a></p>
    <p>You probably should withdraw this request and follow the process
      as written on that site if you are seeking approval. I'm
      particularly interested in the answer to "Describe what gap not
      filled by currently existing licenses that the new license will
      fill."<br>
    </p>
    <p>Citing JSON and Hippocratic in support of your submission is
      probably not a good idea, as those licenses are not OSI approved.
      Nor, likely would they (OSI did tweet about the Hippocratic but I
      don't believe it was ever submitted for approval to OSI:
      <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://x.com/OpenSourceOrg/status/1176229398929977344">https://x.com/OpenSourceOrg/status/1176229398929977344</a>).<br>
    </p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/5/2024 9:09 AM, Ω Alisson wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CACZE8Y4aVvkjgNsKnJMDJjMOjD_3KgpsEvP9VeCbJi4BRuNnAw@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div dir="ltr">The conditions having nothing to do with software
        is debatable. There are examples like the <a
          href="https://www.json.org/license.html"
          moz-do-not-send="true">JSON License</a> (The Software shall be
        used for Good, not Evil), the <a
          href="https://firstdonoharm.dev/" moz-do-not-send="true">Hippocratic
          License</a> (probably not OSI-compliant, but in the same
        ethical vein).<br>
        <br>
        By the License Review Process, is lawyer consultancy obligatory
        or just the mentioning of it?<br>
        <div><span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:"Times New Roman";font-size:medium;background-color:rgb(250,240,230)"><br>
          </span></div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at
          12:58 PM Carlo Piana <<a href="mailto:carlo@piana.eu"
            moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">carlo@piana.eu</a>>
          wrote:<br>
        </div>
        <blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
          <div>
            <div
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Dear
              Alisson,<br>
              <br>
              you purport to have added "conditions", but in fact you
              have added general aspirational staments which technically
              do not consist of conditions. Therefore, the grant is
              conditioned to conditions which are not conditions and
              that have nothing to do with the interaction with
              software. At best, it is matter that would belong in a
              preamble. Please consider this as a technical remark, not
              as a remark on the principles (with which I seem to agree,
              but it's immaterial).<br>
              <br>
              In addition, I think this submission does not fully comply
              with the submission guidelines. I doubt a lawyer has laid
              their eyes on this text and I can't find any such
              indication.<br>
              <br>
              The conclusion IMHO should be "rejection".<br>
              <br>
              With best regards,<br>
              <br>
              Carlo (in his own personal capacity)<br>
              <br>
              <hr id="m_849970376030415655zwchr">
              <div>
                <blockquote
style="border-left:2px solid rgb(16,16,255);margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt"><b>Da:
                  </b>"Ω Alisson" <<a
                    href="mailto:thelinuxlich@gmail.com" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">thelinuxlich@gmail.com</a>><br>
                  <b>A: </b>"<a
                    href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                    class="moz-txt-link-freetext">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a>"
                  <<a
                    href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                    class="moz-txt-link-freetext">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a>><br>
                  <b>Inviato: </b>Mercoledì, 4 settembre 2024 18:45:50<br>
                  <b>Oggetto: </b>[License-review] New License for
                  review: ADVPL 1.0<br>
                </blockquote>
              </div>
              <div>
                <blockquote
style="border-left:2px solid rgb(16,16,255);margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt">
                  <div dir="ltr">
                    <div>In accordance with the <a
                        href="http://opensource.org/approval"
                        target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">License
                        Review Process</a>, I'd like to submit for
                      review the Adversary Public License 1.0 (ADVPL),
                      which is composed of the MIT license text + 7
                      tenets from the Temple of Satan. It complies with
                      all terms of the Open Source Definition, the
                      suggested tag is ADVPL. Currently no significant
                      projects use it, although there is intent once
                      it's approved.<br>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                  <br>
                  _______________________________________________<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"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">opensource.org</a> email
                  address.<br>
                  <br>
                  License-review mailing list<br>
                  <a href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                    class="moz-txt-link-freetext">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a><br>
                  <a
href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                    class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><br>
                </blockquote>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
          _______________________________________________<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" rel="noreferrer"
            target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">opensource.org</a>
          email address.<br>
          <br>
          License-review mailing list<br>
          <a href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org"
            target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
            class="moz-txt-link-freetext">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a><br>
          <a
href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org"
            rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
            class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><br>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
      <pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-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.

License-review mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>