[License-discuss] Rejected license list [was Re: TrueCrypt license (not OSI-approved; seeking history, context).]

[Richard Fontana]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 16:35:20 -0700
Luis Villa <luis at lu.is> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Karl Fogel <kfogel at opensource.org>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Luis Villa <luis at lu.is> wrote:
> > > Might be a good idea to finally start the list of non-open
> > > licenses
> > someone
> > > suggested a few months ago ;)
> >
> > Oh, that is *such* a good idea.
> >
> > This is the "list of licenses that people often mistake for being
> > open source, or whose authors claim are open source, but are
> > actually not or at least have not been evaluated by the OSI", right?
> >
> 
> Slightly more broad than that: a list of licenses that we have
> rejected, including the rationales for rejection. 

Excellent idea.

> Your list would
> presumably be a subset, as some licenses might have been submitted
> and rejected without a later, false claim to being open source.

There are also licenses that are clearly (to me) open source but which
have not been and are unlikely ever to be evaluated by the OSI. 

But there is a separate category of licenses that are claimed to be
open source by their license stewards (at least implicitly in
characterizing the software as open source) but have not been submitted
for approval -- TrueCrypt is presumably an example of this. 

- RF