<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /></head><body style='font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif'>
<p id="reply-intro">On 2025-12-22 16:02, license-review-request@lists.opensource.org wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace">Send License-review mailing list submissions to<br /> <a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a><br /><br />To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br /> <a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><br /><br />or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br /> <a href="mailto:license-review-request@lists.opensource.org">license-review-request@lists.opensource.org</a><br /><br />You can reach the person managing the list at<br /> <a href="mailto:license-review-owner@lists.opensource.org">license-review-owner@lists.opensource.org</a><br /><br />When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br />than "Re: Contents of License-review digest..."<br /><br /><br />Today's Topics:<br /><br /> 1. Re: Approval of my own License,Misty Foundation License 1.7:<br /> (Carlo Piana)<br /> 2. Re: Approval of my own License,Misty Foundation License 1.7:<br /> (McCoy Smith)<br /><br /><br />----------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />Message: 1<br />Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2025 15:23:59 +0100 (CET)<br />From: Carlo Piana <<a href="mailto:carlo@piana.eu">carlo@piana.eu</a>><br />To: License submissions for OSI review<br /> <<a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a>><br />Subject: Re: [License-review] Approval of my own License,Misty<br /> Foundation License 1.7:<br />Message-ID:<br /> <<a href="mailto:1275789598.21789145.1766413439851.JavaMail.zimbra@piana.eu">1275789598.21789145.1766413439851.JavaMail.zimbra@piana.eu</a>><br />Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br /><br />Pam, Misty, <br /><br />this was also my immediate reaction. Why another MIT-style license [0], the hundredth or so? <br /><br />Also, even for someone who has not has not bothered reading the review process requirements, a brief of introduction to oneself and a signature of a real person representing the entity would probably be a modicum of courtesy required in all kinds of communication, including this one. <br /><br />The lack of quality in the licensing text itself is also apparent, never mind the absolute lack of the necessary information accompanying the submission. <br /><br />EG, the grant says " distribute the Software …free of charge". One wonders what's the ellipsis for, whether "free of charge" refers to the distribution right, the entirety of rights or, conversely, the permission. If it's a condition as in "distribute but only free of charge", this would be an incompatible limitation with #1 (The license shall not restrict any party from *selling* or giving away the software [...]") and probably #6. <br /><br />I would advise to withdraw the submission and reconsider the entire process, and most of all please consider the option to adopt one of the many similar already approved licenses, on non-proliferation grounds. <br /><br />All the best, <br /><br />Carlo, in his personal capacity. <br /><br />[0] my personal AI-based license analysis tool gives 84% overlapping with MIT; the non overlapping part is the one that probably would create more problems. <br /><br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">Da: "Pamela Chestek" <<a href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a>><br />A: "<a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a>><br />Inviato: Lunedì, 22 dicembre 2025 0:21:08<br />Oggetto: Re: [License-review] Approval of my own License,Misty Foundation<br />License 1.7:</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">Hi Misty Foundation,</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">You should read this page, [ <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process</a> |<br /><a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process</a> ] , and submit the license with<br />the additional information as outlined on that webpage. My quick take on it is<br />that it a much poorer version of a number of other licenses out there, so pay<br />particular attention to the request that a license submitter must "describe<br />what gap not filled by currently existing licenses that the new license will<br />fill."</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">Even at a glance, this license is suboptimal. For starters, it appears to have a<br />typo at the end of the definition for "Software." By today's standards the<br />copyright grant doesn't have sufficiently inclusive language and it also<br />doesn't include a patent license grant, which would be good to think about.<br />Pamela S. Chestek<br />Chestek Legal<br />4641 Post St.<br />Unit 4316<br />El Dorado Hills, CA 95762<br />+1 919-800-8033<br />pamela@chesteklegal<br />[ <a href="http://www.chesteklegal.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">http://www.chesteklegal.com/</a> | <a href="http://www.chesteklegal.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">www.chesteklegal.com</a> ]</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">On 12/19/2025 3:59 AM, mistypigeon via License-review wrote:</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">Misty Foundation License 1.7</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">Copyright (c) (YEAR) (YOUR NAME)</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">By obtaining, using, and/or copying this Software, you agree that you have read,<br />understood, and will comply with the following terms and conditions:</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">Software refers to the source code, binary files, and documentation provided<br />under this License.Hi</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">" Licensor " refers to the copyright holder (the creator of the Software) listed<br />above.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">Permission is granted to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, and distribute the<br />Software …free of charge, PROVIDED THAT:</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">You cannot use the Licensor's name to promote products derived from the<br />Software, unless with direct permission from them.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">All of this License (including the copyright notice, definitions, and<br />conditions) must be included in all copies (including distributions/derivation)<br />or substantial portions of the Software.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED 'AS IS', WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR<br />IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR<br />PURPOSE OR NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE LICENSOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY<br />CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY.<br />_______________________________________________<br />The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily<br />those of the Open Source Initiative. Communication from the Open Source<br />Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">License-review mailing list [ mailto:<a href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a> |<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" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><br />|<br /><a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><br />]</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">_______________________________________________<br />The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily<br />those of the Open Source Initiative. Communication from the Open Source<br />Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">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" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a></blockquote>
-------------- next part --------------<br />An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br />URL: <<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20251222/4fe9fa0f/attachment-0001.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20251222/4fe9fa0f/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br /><br />------------------------------<br /><br />Message: 2<br />Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2025 08:01:38 -0800<br />From: McCoy Smith <<a href="mailto:mccoy@lexpan.law">mccoy@lexpan.law</a>><br />To: <a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a><br />Subject: Re: [License-review] Approval of my own License,Misty<br /> Foundation License 1.7:<br />Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:ac165c56-8c2d-4c8f-abbd-50b551460a03@lexpan.law">ac165c56-8c2d-4c8f-abbd-50b551460a03@lexpan.law</a>><br />Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"<br /><br />here's what a compare looks like.<br /><br />There's mostly just a lot of just moving around language without <br />substantive change.<br /><br />The only substantive changes I see are:<br /><br />1. A statement that "obtaining, using or copying the Software" <br />constitutes acceptance of its terms. I'm not sure whether simply <br />"obtaining" can be something that triggers a contractual acceptance.<br /><br />2. Defining Licensor, although only in the singular, as the creator, not <br />any subsequent modifiers/copyright holders. This makes the obligations <br />discriminatory as the prohibition of using the "Licensor"s name would <br />only apply to the original author, not any subsequent author. Same <br />applies to the disclaimers -- applies only to Licensor/original author, <br />not any subsequent author, so is discriminatory. Thus violates OSD 5.<br /><br />As noted, the ellipsis is ambiguous and not correct or good legal <br />drafting. I think any future submission would need to indicate a legal <br />review has been done, and by whom, in view of this.<br /><br />On 12/22/2025 6:23 AM, Carlo Piana via License-review wrote:<br /><br />Pam, Misty,<br /><br />this was also my immediate reaction. Why another MIT-style license [0], <br />the hundredth or so?<br /><br />Also, even for someone who has not has not bothered reading the review <br />process requirements, a brief of introduction to oneself and a signature <br />of a real person representing the entity would probably be a modicum of <br />courtesy required in all kinds of communication, including this one.<br /><br />The lack of quality in the licensing text itself is also apparent, never <br />mind the absolute lack of the necessary information accompanying the <br />submission.<br /><br />EG, the grant says " distribute the Software …free of charge". One <br />wonders what's the ellipsis for, whether "free of charge" refers to the <br />distribution right, the entirety of rights or, conversely, the <br />permission. If it's a condition as in "distribute but only free of <br />charge", this would be an incompatible limitation with #1 (The license <br />shall not restrict any party from *selling* or giving away the software <br />[...]") and probably #6.<br /><br />I would advise to withdraw the submission and reconsider the entire <br />process, and most of all please consider the option to adopt one of the <br />many similar already approved licenses, on non-proliferation grounds.<br /><br />All the best,<br /><br />Carlo, in his personal capacity.<br /><br /><br />[0] my personal AI-based license analysis tool gives 84% overlapping <br />with MIT; the non overlapping part is the one that probably would create <br />more problems.<br /><br />------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br /> *Da: *"Pamela Chestek" <<a href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a>><br /> *A: *"<a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a>"<br /> <<a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a>><br /> *Inviato: *Lunedì, 22 dicembre 2025 0:21:08<br /> *Oggetto: *Re: [License-review] Approval of my own License,Misty<br /> Foundation License 1.7:<br /><br /> Hi Misty Foundation,<br /><br /> You should read this page,<br /> <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process</a>, and submit the<br /> license with the additional information as outlined on that<br /> webpage. My quick take on it is that it a much poorer version of a<br /> number of other licenses out there, so pay particular attention to<br /> the request that a license submitter must "describe what gap not<br /> filled by currently existing licenses that the new license will fill."<br /><br /> Even at a glance, this license is suboptimal. For starters, it<br /> appears to have a typo at the end of the definition for "Software."<br /> By today's standards the copyright grant doesn't have sufficiently<br /> inclusive language and it also doesn't include a patent license<br /> grant, which would be good to think about.<br /><br /> Pamela S. Chestek<br /> Chestek Legal<br /> 4641 Post St.<br /> Unit 4316<br /> El Dorado Hills, CA 95762<br /> +1 919-800-8033<br /> pamela@chesteklegal<br /> <a href="http://www.chesteklegal.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">www.chesteklegal.com</a><br />-------------- next part --------------<br />An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br />URL: <<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20251222/6526ffe7/attachment.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20251222/6526ffe7/attachment.htm</a>><br />-------------- next part --------------<br />A non-text attachment was scrubbed...<br />Name: misty compare mit.odt<br />Type: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text<br />Size: 40559 bytes<br />Desc: not available<br />URL: <<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20251222/6526ffe7/attachment.odt" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20251222/6526ffe7/attachment.odt</a>><br /><br />------------------------------<br /><br />Subject: Digest Footer<br /><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" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><br /><br /><br />------------------------------<br /><br />End of License-review Digest, Vol 146, Issue 22<br />***********************************************</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Sorry for being late I didn't see this,Okay,I will see the links \U0001f605 </p>
</body></html>