LAB Public License proposal

[Ernest Prabhakar]

Hi DJ,


On Mar 16, 2004, at 10:26 AM, DJ Anubis wrote:

> Le lundi 15 Mars 2004 21:35, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. a écrit :
>> It might help if you highlighted the changes (using color text or bold
>> facing). Is your explanation as to why you have declined to adopt the 
>> CUA
>> Office Public License limited to the desire to "comply" with 
>> regulations in
>> three jurisdictions? Would you be more specific?
>>
>> Rod
>
> A highlighted version is on line at
> http://www.lab-project.net/tests_priv/liclab-annotated.html
> for review.

Thanks, the highlights help enormously.  It looks like the only direct 
changes are:

> 10. LICENSE means this document in  its integrality, without reserve 
> or disclaimer other than herein published.
>
> 3.2. Availability of Source Code.
> 	• 	
>  and if made available via ELECTRONIC DISTRIBUTION MECHANISM,  must 
> remain available for
> at least  twenty-four (24) months after the  date it initially became 
> available, or
> at least  twelve (12) months after a subsequent  version of that 
> particular MODIFICATIONS has been made available to  such recipients. 
> YOU are responsible for ensuring that the SOURCE CODE version remains 
> available even if the ELECTRONIC DISTRIBUTION  MECHANISM is maintained 
> by a third party.
>
> 3.3. Description of Modifications.
>
>  In your SOURCE CODE, YOU must include comments marking the beginning 
> and end of your MODIFICATIONS, as well as your name.
>
>
> .4. Inability to Comply Due to Statute or Regulation.
> 	1.  	Inform ORIGINAL  AUTHOR of statute, judicial or regulation 
> incompatibility and ask  for an allowance to specific limitations.
>  Attention:
>  ORIGINAL AUTHOR can allow you to distribute a LICENSE limited  
> COVERED CODE, but you first must ask.
> 	2.  	
>  Comply with the terms of this LICENSE to the maximum extent possible  
> You  cannot reject the whole LICENSE when only one statement is not  
> acceptable du to regulations, statute or judicial order. Only the  
> relevant statement may be discarded, after informing ORIGINAL  AUTHOR.

I don't see anything there that would be likely to affect OSD 
compliance.   However, Section 4 seems slightly ambiguous - it might be 
clearer if you said, "You must comply with all of the following 
conditions, or you must refrain from using the software." or whatever 
the intent actually is.

I frankly don't quite understand Section 10, but perhaps that's due to 
the translating back and forth.

> One of the reson we had to change some things from CUA Office Public 
> License
> have to do with French laws imposing some legal mentions on all 
> contractual
> papers or forms. We had to introduce a section for French Government 
> End
> Users.
>
> In final, CUA Office Public License is great, only missing non USA 
> specific
> legal information. This license only fills the gap.

To be honest, I am a little unhappy with all the "Attentions".    Some 
of them I agree are useful to clarify the intent and purpose of the 
license.    Some of them seem more like commentary than clarification, 
for example:

> 2. If YOU created one or more MODIFICATIONS, YOU must add your  name 
> as a CONTRIBUTOR to the notice described in EXHIBIT  A - Lab Public 
> License Required information..
>  Attention:
>  Fair practice. YOU have to be credited for your work.

Perhaps it is just the language, but this article seems to require you 
to accept -responsibility- for the work, not that other people give you 
credit.  A minor detail, but since I didn't carefully review all the 
Attentions, I'm not entirely comfortable that all of them support the 
license as intended.

This raises a larger, somewhat sensitive issue.   I greatly appreciate 
all the effort you've gone through to submit and revise this license to 
address our concerns.   However, given that this is for use in France, 
I would surmise that you are not a native English speaker.    There are 
several places where the phrasing and spelling seem inappropriate, or 
at least slightly confusing.    I think it would be worthwhile for you 
to find a friendly English collaborator to work on the wording of the 
"Attentions," to avoid possible misunderstandings and ensure they are 
aligned with the larger license terms.

I don't know that this is necessary for OSD compliance, but then again 
I'm not sure it isn't.

Best of luck,
Ernie Prabhakar
IANAL, TINLA, etc.


>
> -- 
> JCR
> aka DJ Anubis
> LAB Project Initiator & coordinator
> --
> license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3