<div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><div><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto">Hi Max,</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I am an outsider just observing the thread. This seems kind of exhausting so I thought maybe I would jump in offlist and see if I can be helpful (hopefully I can!)</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">My impression is that the primary issue is not opposition to the substance of your request, but rather that the submission materials don't fit well with OSI's normal approval structure.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">To make that clear, it may be easiest to just split this nto three separate submissions, with each individual submission fitting with how OSI normally processes and approves stuff.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Something like:</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Submission A. Approval of Python-2.0.1 as an OSI-approved legacy license.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Submission B. Approval of CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible as a standalone historical legacy license.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Submission C. Request Python-2.0 Historical Clarification from OSI</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Below is a possible structure you could maybe use. When I was licensing and compliance manager for the FSF years ago, I do remember reading the license and thinking a little on it. But that was long ago so I don't trust if I got the facts correct, below!</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">---</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Submission A: Python-2.0.1</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Requested Action</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Request that OSI approve Python-2.0.1 as an OSI-approved legacy Open Source license.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Request additionally that OSI recognize Python-2.0.1 as the GPL-compatible historical licensing form associated with CPython releases beginning with Python 2.0.1.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Canonical Artifacts</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">OSI-approved predecessor:</div><div dir="auto"><a href="https://opensource.org/license/Python-2.0" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://opensource.org/license/Python-2.0</a></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">SPDX canonical text:</div><div dir="auto"><a href="https://spdx.org/licenses/Python-2.0.1.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://spdx.org/licenses/Python-2.0.1.html</a></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">SPDX source text:</div><div dir="auto"><a href="https://github.com/spdx/license-list-data/blob/main/text/Python-2.0.1.txt" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://github.com/spdx/license-list-data/blob/main/text/Python-2.0.1.txt</a></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Historical Python release:</div><div dir="auto"><a href="https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-201/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-201/</a></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Relationship to Existing Approved License</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Python-2.0.1 preserves the same overall historical structure already approved by OSI for Python-2.0, including the PSF, BeOpen, CNRI, and CWI portions.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Primary Substantive Difference</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The principal substantive change between Python-2.0 and Python-2.0.1 is the revision to the CNRI clause associated with GPL compatibility concerns (including the choice-of-law "Virginia clause").</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Python-2.0 references Python <b>1.6b1-era</b> licensing text. Python-2.0.1 references Python <b>1.6.1-era</b> licensing text.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Outside of the GPL-compatibility revision, remaining changes are more or less references, dates, and non-substantive wording.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Minimal Delta Summary</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Python-2.0 contains the earlier CNRI language associated with GPL incompatibility concerns.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Python-2.0.1 replaces that language with the revised GPL-compatible form.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">No new restrictions, field-of-use limitations, royalty requirements, or discriminatory provisions are introduced relative to Python-2.0 in the text of Python-2.0.1. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Historical Rationale</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Python-2.0.1 is the license most closely associated with the license CPython has been distributed under since 2001 (happy 25th!)</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">That's why SPDX tracks Python-2.0.1 as <i>the</i> GPL-compatible Python license.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This request is primarily intended to align longstanding Python distribution practice, SPDX classification, and OSI approval records.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">---</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Submission B: CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Requested Action</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Request approval of CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible as a standalone historical legacy license.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Canonical Artifacts</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">SPDX canonical text:</div><div dir="auto"><a href="https://spdx.org/licenses/CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://spdx.org/licenses/CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible.html</a></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Relationship to Python-2.0.1</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This text corresponds to the GPL-compatible revision of the CNRI portion incorporated into Python-2.0.1.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Clarification of Intent</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This submission requests recognition of the GPL-compatible CNRI text as a separately identifiable historical license artifact, not merely as an embedded component within Python-2.0.1.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Rationale</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">SPDX tracks CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible independently, and the GPL-compatible revision is central to the historical distinction between Python-2.0 and Python-2.0.1.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">---</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto">Submission C: Python-2.0 Historical Clarification</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Requested Action</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This submission requests that OSI clarify the historical relationship between Python-2.0 and Python-2.0.1 in the OSI license records.</div><div dir="auto">Rationale</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Python-2.0.1 more accurately reflects the GPL-compatible licensing form associated with CPython distribution beginning in 2001.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This request is not intended to invalidate Python-2.0 historically, but rather to reduce confusion between the earlier Python-2.0 form and the GPL-compatible Python-2.0.1 form tracked by SPDX and associated with subsequent CPython distribution.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Best,</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Josh</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Joshua Gay</div><div dir="auto">Sr. Manager SA Open Source Community & Infrastructure</div><div dir="auto"><a href="https://saopen.ieee.org">https://saopen.ieee.org</a></div><div dir="auto">m: +1 617.966.9792</div><div dir="auto">meet: <a href="https://calendly.com/jgay-ieee">https://calendly.com/jgay-ieee</a></div></div></div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, May 19, 2026, 6:56\u202fAM Max Mehl <<a href="mailto:Max.Mehl@deutschebahn.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Max.Mehl@deutschebahn.com</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="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Hi McCoy,</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt">
<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">Let me start with the several parts of the license topic. As you may know, OSI approved Python-2.0 in exactly this form:
<a href="https://opensource.org/license/Python-2.0" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
https://opensource.org/license/Python-2.0</a></span></div>
<div style="direction:ltr"><span style="font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">It contains the PSF, the BeOpen.com, the CNRI, and the CWI parts. The Python-2.0.1 version SPDX lists on their website (
<a href="https://spdx.org/licenses/Python-2.0.1.html" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
https://spdx.org/licenses/Python-2.0.1.html</a> )</span><span style="font-size:16px;color:rgb(0,0,0)"> has the very same structure. To not confuse consumers of OSI</span>\u2019<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">s licensing information more than necessary and
avoid conflicts with SPDX</span>\u2019s data<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">, I would suggest to make an exception to the generally advisable rule you mentioned.</span></div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-size:16px;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:16px;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
The same applies to CNRI-Python and the requested CNRI-Python-GPL-Compliant. It\u2019s probably not used in the wild, but as the \u201cold\u201d version once has been approved and is the main reason why Python-2.0 is GPL-incompatible, an exception is acceptable IMHO.</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Now, to the license text itself. As written in my initial message, I\u2019ve attached the license text that SPDX communicates as Python-2.0.1, based on the text file in their license-list-data repo:
<a href="https://github.com/spdx/license-list-data/blob/main/text/Python-2.0.1.txt" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-data/blob/main/text/Python-2.0.1.txt</a></div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
How to spot the difference? Python-2.0 often refers to Python 1.6b1, while Python-2.0.1 refers to Python 1.6.1 - the version, with which the GPL compatibility has been ensured, in the same step as Python 2.0.1.</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt">
<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">Regarding the differences, the history itself is shortly explained by PSF/<a href="http://python.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">python.org</a> here in their current licensing document as well as the 2.0.1 release notes:
<a href="https://docs.python.org/3/license.html" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
https://docs.python.org/3/license.html</a> / <a href="https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-201/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-201/</a></span></div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt">
<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">To ease your review, I\u2019ve created a diff using GitHub\u2019s diff display, which you can set to \u201cSplit\u201d and \u201cUnified\u201d. Please see the diff of revision 5 (the latest at the moment of writing) here:
<a href="https://gist.github.com/mxmehl/d3e8694e30fc94cc6517529b5441ebc5/revisions?diff=split&w" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
https://gist.github.com/mxmehl/d3e8694e30fc94cc6517529b5441ebc5/revisions?diff=split&w</a></span></div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
>From my understanding, aside from small wording and typographical edits as well as version and year bumps, the most significant content-wise change is in CNRI point 7 which heals the cause of GPL incompatibility (\u201cVirginia clause\u201d).</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
More analysis and interpretation has been collected in the license-discuss@ thread as well as the GitHub issues and SPDX mailing lists threads mentioned in my initial messages, so I won\u2019t repeat them here.</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Regarding work with the Python folks: my understanding from a multi-year effort to get PSF to finally get their license OSI approved is that they don\u2019t have the resources (and seemingly little interest), so Deb agreed I can make this move in March 2026. I understand
this isn\u2019t optimal for OSI, but given that the license of one of the most used programming languages hasn\u2019t been OSI-approved since 25 years hopefully warrants some tolerance. </div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Best,</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Max </div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color:inherit;background-color:inherit" id="m_5430329867946651555m_5767717368332708747ms-outlook-mobile-signature">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="direction:ltr;margin:0cm;font-family:Aptos,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;color:black">
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div id="m_5430329867946651555m_5767717368332708747mail-editor-reference-message-container" style="color:inherit;background-color:inherit">
<div style="direction:ltr">
</div>
<div style="padding:3pt 0in 0in;border-width:1pt medium medium;border-style:solid none none;border-color:rgb(181,196,223) currentcolor currentcolor">
<div style="text-align:left;font-family:Aptos;font-size:12pt;color:black">
<b>From: </b>License-review <<a href="mailto:license-review-bounces@lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">license-review-bounces@lists.opensource.org</a>> on behalf of McCoy Smith <mccoy@lexpan.law><br>
<b>Date: </b>Friday, 15. May 2026 at 02:02<br>
<b>To: </b><a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a> <<a href="mailto:license-review@lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">license-review@lists.opensource.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [License-review] Submission: Python-2.0.1<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<p>Max:</p>
<p>The file you attached appears to be the 2.0 version of the Python license not the 2.0.1 version, although the diff file appears to reflect the 2.0.1 version. Also, the 2.0.1 version seems to incorporate
the CNRI-GPL compatible portion, which you've also separately asked to be approved (it is not clear to me if this is intended to be a request to approve it as a separate stand-alone license or as just a component of the Python 2.0.1. license; this is somewhat
complicated by these licenses appearing to be concatenations of a list of multiple different licenses).</p>
<p>I understand that the Python licensing situation seems to be a mess, and the approvals at SPDX and OSI may not comport with long-standing licensing practice, but I think if there's a request for approval
is required, we'd need to know exactly what actual licenses need approval (OSI doesn't approve separate parts of licenses, unless they are themselves stand-alone licenses being used in that way), and have a clear understanding of are the differences between
older licenses that have been approved and what the current license for which approval is requested. Frankly, I'm having a real hard time doing that (the diff file isn't helping much as it doesn't really highlight differences, it just shows whole blocks that
might or might not be identical being swapped out). I tried to do a compare in LibreOffice between what looks like 2.0.1. and 2.0 but that didn't help either.</p>
<p>Could you work with the folks at Python to put together a clearer explanation of what is the license or licenses that Python is using, how they differ from the license or licenses that have been approved
in the past, and why those changes were made? I'm not sure what OSI has now is sufficient for us to make an intelligent analysis and decision on the various Python licenses.</p>
<p>McCoy Smith</p>
<div>On 3/20/2026 9:13 AM, Max Mehl wrote:</div>
<blockquote>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Dear all,</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Following a <a href="https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2026-March/022526.html" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
discussion on license-discuss@</a> and a quick coordination with Deb from the Python Software Foundation (in Cc), I would like to propose that Python-2.0.1 be considered an officially approved (legacy) Open Source license. In the same step, I propose to mark
Python-2.0 as either Superseded or <span style="font-family:Aptos;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
Voluntarily Retired.</span></div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">In parallel, I propose the same for CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible, for which I opened a separate thread.</span></div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
I will not repeat all the backstory but refer to the aforementioned discussion and
<a href="https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2197" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
spdx/license-list-XML#2197</a>. In short: Python-2.0.1 is the license that most closely represents the license under which CPython has been
<a href="https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-201/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
published since 2001</a> (in combination with 0BSD for documentation). In comparison with Python-2.0, which is already OSI approved, the most remarkable difference is an update in the CNRI portion to make it GPL compatible.</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Attached, you will find the license text for Python-2.0.1 as made available by SPDX, as well as a diff file against Python-2.0 (ignoring formatting and some non-critical boilerplate texts to make things easier for you).</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Best,</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Max </div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Aptos,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<div id="m_5430329867946651555m_5767717368332708747ms-outlook-mobile-signature" style="color:inherit;background-color:inherit">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:Aptos,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black">-- </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:Aptos,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black"><b>Max Mehl</b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:Aptos,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black">Open Source / Supply Chain</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:Aptos,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black">Enterprise-Team Chief Technology Office (CTO)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:Aptos,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black">DB Systel GmbH / Deutsche Bahn</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:Aptos,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black"><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:Aptos,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black">Schedule a meeting: <a href="https://cal.com/mxmehl" style="margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:0px" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
cal.com/mxmehl</a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:Aptos,sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black"><br>
</span></p>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr">
<br>
</div>
<hr>
<div><br>
<a href="https://www.deutschebahn.com/pflichtangaben/20260319" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">Pflichtangaben anzeigen</a><br>
<br>
Nähere Informationen zur Datenverarbeitung im DB-Konzern finden Sie hier: <a href="https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz</a></div>
<pre><div>_______________________________________________
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 noreferrer" target="_blank">opensource.org</a> email address.
License-review mailing list
<a href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a>
</div></pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<hr>
<br>
<a href="https://www.deutschebahn.com/pflichtangaben/20260518" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">Pflichtangaben anzeigen</a><br>
<br>
Nähere Informationen zur Datenverarbeitung im DB-Konzern finden Sie hier: <a href="https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz</a>
</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 noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">opensource.org</a> email address.<br>
<br>
License-review mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>
<br><br><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><br><br></div></div>