<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Hi,<br><br>- Do you believe that this group should be the one to review the new documents, or should a separate group be created for it?</div><div dir="ltr">Since this group has the most knowledge and experience in dealing with intellectual property rights licenses, I don't see the need to create a new group.</div><br>- What new challenges do you expect to see in reviewing these licenses?<div>Consideration of rights other than copyright will likely be necessary. <br>For example, Creative Commons licenses specify the waiver of moral rights, publicity rights, privacy rights, etc., so.. with data licenses, it will be necessary to ensure that these rights are not exercised.</div><div><p>In March, I pointed out that the Blue Oak Model License does not consider moral rights.<br>The consensus in this thread was that, for software programs, not considering moral rights is not an issue in most jurisdictions worldwide, but it can be a problem in East Asian countries, particularly in Japan. <br>At the time, I did not take significant action because it seemed to be an issue limited to a few countries, and there were not many projects adopting this license.<br> <a href="https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2024-March/thread.html#22222">https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2024-March/thread.html#22222</a><br><br>However, recently, there was a request within my organization to apply this license, and after discussions with multiple legal department members who hold law degrees,<br>it was determined that in Japan, the Blue Oak License retains moral rights with the authors, posing a risk that usage could be stopped at any time.<br>This cannot be considered an Open Source Data license. Also, regarding data, there are likely many jurisdictions where moral rights are not as restricted as they are for software.<br><br>- Do you recommend any changes to the process in light of potential new challenges?<br>How about creating a system where licenses that have been reviewed and approved can undergo a re-review?<br>Frankly, the previously mentioned Blue Oak Model License cannot legally be treated as open source in Japan.<br>I hope a re-review mechanism will be established to address cases like this, where a license might be problematic only in the EU or in certain countries in Asia, and could otherwise be overlooked.<br></p>Thanks,<br><br><br></div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">2024/09/01 21:54 Stefano Maffulli <<a href="mailto:stefano@opensource.org">stefano@opensource.org</a>>:<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 dir="ltr"><div style="font-size:small"><div style="font-size:small">Dear license-review volunteers,<br>
<br>
It is likely that OSI will be receiving requests to approve new
licenses, agreements, and terms of use/distribution for open source
AI works. These documents may apply, not just to copyrighted
software, but to non-software artifacts like datasets,
documentation, and model parameters (aka weights). </div><div style="font-size:small"><br></div><div style="font-size:small">To be clear, the
OSI has no intention to be evaluating AI systems for compliance to
the Open Source AI Definition. This is only about reviewing licenses
and other legal documents, whether intended to accompany a complete
AI system or the individual components of AI systems.<span><br>
<br>
The questions for this group:<br></span>
- Do you believe that this group should be the one to review the new
documents, or should a separate group be created for it?<br>
- What new challenges do you expect to see in reviewing these
licenses?<br>
- Do you recommend any changes to the process in light of potential
new challenges?</div><div style="font-size:small"><br></div><div style="font-size:small">Thanks,</div><div style="font-size:small">Stef<font color="#888888"><br></font></div></div><br><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><b>Executive Director - Open Source Initiative<br></b></div><div></div><div>Book a meeting: <a href="https://cal.com/smaffulli/meeting" target="_blank">https://cal.com/smaffulli/meeting</a><br></div></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">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" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div>Shuji Sado</div><div>Chairman, Open Source Group Japan<br><a href="https://opensource.jp/" target="_blank">https://opensource.jp/</a></div><div><a href="https://shujisado.com/" target="_blank">https://shujisado.com/</a></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div>