<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>One requirement for approval of new licenses is:</p>
<ul class="wp-block-list"
style="box-sizing: border-box; overflow-wrap: break-word; border: 0px; font-family: "Libre Franklin", sans-serif, sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-size: 19.0048px; font-weight: 400; line-height: 1.1em; margin: 0px 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px 0px 0px 1em; max-width: 730px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-thickness: initial; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial;">
<li
style="box-sizing: border-box; overflow-wrap: break-word; border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: normal; font-size: 19.0048px; font-weight: 400; line-height: 1.6; margin: 0.3em 0px 1em; padding: 0px;">Describe
any legal review the license has been through, including whether
it was drafted by a lawyer.</li>
</ul>
<p>I don't see that that has been done here.</p>
<p>This is particularly important in this case because you state
that the "Creator Note" is intended to be a "standardized,
non-binding (non-legal) field" but you have not explained how the
language used here creates that effect, or how it prevents the
"Creator Note" from being written to be binding and
OSD-incompliant.</p>
<p>Absent that, I don't see how there is any way to establish that
this license is not amenable to being modified, according to its
terms, in a way that violates the OSD.</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/16/2026 3:36 AM, PTFS wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAM8L+9SXjT30G4uH=8DN-895umKx7=GhV69-V2gAE6+fOsjQVQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail-Y3BBE">Dear Carlo,</div>
<div class="gmail-Y3BBE">Thank you for your candid and
professional feedback. I understand your concerns regarding
license proliferation and the legal nuances of the MIT
structure.<span class="gmail-txxDge gmail-notranslate"><span
class="gmail-vKEkVd"></span></span></div>
<div class="gmail-Y3BBE">To be clear, the reason it's
confusing to read is because I have Autism and ADHD, which
means that when I tell people stuff in a different way.</div>
<div class="gmail-Y3BBE"><span class="gmail-Yjhzub">1.
Regarding Sublicensing:</span><br>
The removal of the sub licensing clause was an attempt at
simplification, but I acknowledge that it creates legal
ambiguity. I will restore the standard MIT language ("and to
permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do
so...") to ensure full legal compatibility and clarity for
downstream users.<span
class="gmail-txxDge gmail-notranslate"><span
class="gmail-vKEkVd"></span></span></div>
<div class="gmail-Y3BBE"><span class="gmail-Yjhzub">2.
Rationale and Proliferation:</span><br>
I hear your invitation not to create "entropy." However, I
believe IDCIYMI addresses a specific social gap in 2026.
While the legal core is MIT, the <span class="gmail-Yjhzub">"Creator
Note"</span> is intended to be a standardized, <span
class="gmail-Yjhzub">non-binding (non-legal)</span> field.
In current practice, creator intent is scattered across
READMEs and NOTICE files in inconsistent ways. IDCIYMI aims
to provide a formal, predictable "home" for this
aspirational language without altering the legal conditions
of the license itself.<span
class="gmail-txxDge gmail-notranslate"><span
class="gmail-vKEkVd"></span></span></div>
<div class="gmail-Y3BBE"><span class="gmail-Yjhzub">3.
Clarifying Aspirational Language:</span><br>
To avoid the "confusion" you mentioned, I will add a clear
prefix to the section stating: <em class="eujQNb">"The
following Creator Note is for informational purposes only
and does not constitute a legal condition of this
license."</em><span class="gmail-txxDge gmail-notranslate"><span
class="gmail-vKEkVd"></span></span></div>
<div class="gmail-Y3BBE">I am a beginner developer (Bernardo
Hora) passionate about modding culture. My goal is to lower
the "fear of entry" for new modders who find traditional
legal text intimidating. I am open to further adjusting the
text to ensure it provides value to the ecosystem without
wasting the community's time.<span
class="gmail-txxDge gmail-notranslate"><span
class="gmail-vKEkVd"></span></span></div>
<div class="gmail-Y3BBE">Best regards,<span
class="gmail-txxDge gmail-notranslate"><span
class="gmail-vKEkVd"></span></span></div>
<div class="gmail-Y3BBE">Bernardo Hora<span
class="gmail-txxDge gmail-notranslate"><span
class="gmail-vKEkVd"></span></span></div>
<hr class="gmail-j3tEEe"><br
class="gmail-Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at
11:10\u202fAM Carlo Piana via License-review <<a
href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote">Dear Bernardo, <br>
<br>
I notice that the most relevant change to the MIT is the
removal of the<br>
<br>
> and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished
to do so, subject to the following conditions<br>
<br>
part. This is the "sublicensing" permission. I am not sure a
sublicensing permission is required, since the later users
of the software can derive this permission from the original
licensing, however they would receive the software, without
the need to receive it as an effect of the last
distribution. But I don't quite get the rationale of having
a new MIT-style license which leaves this implicit. Has a
lawyer performed any kind of assessment here? Why?<br>
<br>
Moreover, the addition of aspirational language in legal
text, especially without a clear indication that this is not
legal text, is IMHO a source of potentially confusing
language, and is for sure an invitation to create more
proliferation and entropy. Have you have ever tried to
perform an OSS compliance audit on any piece of software
only to find the umpteenth license to clear for no reason at
all, but nonetheless requiring human intervention -- as it
is slightly different from allo others? This is a total
waste of time and energy and I personally invite all
submitters NOT to do that unless there are really compelling
legal reasons, or proof of widespread adoption, both totally
absent here.<br>
<br>
I take the view that this license does not meet the
requirements for being added to the list of officially
approved licenses, although per se does not seem to violate
any OSD rule, at a cursory evaluation.<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
<br>
Carlo, in his personal capacity.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
----- Messaggio originale -----<br>
> Da: "PTFS" <<a href="mailto:pfts.offical@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pfts.offical@gmail.com</a>><br>
> 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>"
<<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>
> Inviato: Sabato, 10 gennaio 2026 14:14:18<br>
> Oggetto: [License-review] License Review: IDCIYMI-1.0
(I Don't Care If You Mod It)<br>
<br>
> Dear OSI License Review Committee,<br>
> I am formally submitting the "I Don't Care If You Mod
It" (IDCIYMI) license,<br>
> version 1.0, for official approval as an Open Source
license.<br>
<br>
> 1. License Text<br>
<br>
>
========================================================<br>
> IDCIYMI License (I Don't Care If You Mod It)<br>
> Copyright (c) 2026 [Name]<br>
> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any
person obtaining a copy<br>
> of this software and associated documentation files
(the "Software"), to deal<br>
> in the Software without restriction, including without
limitation the rights<br>
> to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute,
sublicense, and/or sell<br>
> copies of the Software.<br>
> The only condition is that the above copyright notice
and this permission<br>
> notice shall be included in all copies or substantial
portions of the Software.<br>
> CREATOR NOTE:<br>
> [Add your note here. For example: "I built this for the
community\u2014please mod it<br>
> and share what you create!"]<br>
> THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF
ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR<br>
> IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY,<br>
> FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.
IN NO EVENT SHALL THE<br>
> AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM,
DAMAGES OR OTHER<br>
> LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR
OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,<br>
> OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE.<br>
> ==============================================<br>
<br>
> 1. Rationale The IDCIYMI license fills a unique
social gap by standardizing a<br>
> "Creator Note" field within a permissive legal
framework. While legally similar<br>
> to MIT, it provides a dedicated space for authors to
express their intent and<br>
> encouragement for modifications without introducing
legally binding<br>
> restrictions that would violate the OSD. This
fosters a culture of remixing and<br>
> open collaboration.<br>
> 2. Open Source Definition (OSD) Affirmation I
affirmatively state that this<br>
> license complies with the Open Source Definition.
Specifically:<br>
<br>
> *<br>
> OSD 3 (Derived Works): It explicitly permits
modifications and sublicensing.<br>
> * OSD 5 & 6 (No Discrimination): The license and
its "Creator Note" are<br>
> structured to ensure no groups or fields of
endeavor are restricted.<br>
> * OSD 9 (License Must Not Restrict Other Software):
It does not restrict other<br>
> software distributed with it.<br>
<br>
> 1.<br>
> Stewardship I, Bernardo Hora, am the steward of this
license.<br>
> 2. Existing Usage Since I do not use GitHub, the
license and the software using<br>
> it can be found at the following public locations:<br>
<br>
> site : [ <a href="https://idciymi.neocities.org/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://idciymi.neocities.org/</a>
| <a href="https://idciymi.neocities.org/" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://idciymi.neocities.org/</a>
] (the<br>
> site is in wip)<br>
<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 <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>
<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" 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>
</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>