[License-discuss] Developing a new open source license
bruce at perens.com
Thu Jan 31 17:51:38 UTC 2019
With all respect and understanding of the motivations of the group behind
this, I have a really big problem with this part:
Unlike other current open source licenses, the Autonomous Agent License
will require software that implements a compatible API or publicly performs
the API to also be open source.
I am the standards chair of the Open Source Initiative. *If the provision
you propose in this license was used by standards associations, they could
trivially prohibit Open Source implementations of their standard APIs.*
This is obviously something that OSI would have to fight in court.
Thus, it's a really, really bad idea for OSI to stand for such a provision
by approving a license containing it.
Also, almost trivially compared to the above issue, this obviously violates
So, unfortunately I really have to recommend in the strongest way that a
license incorporating that term not be approved.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 9:17 AM VanL <van.lindberg at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello all,
> I have been retained to help develop a new, strong copyleft open source
> license for a client, Holo Ltd. We have been going back and forth
> internally for a little while and we will shortly be putting out a draft
> for public comment. After the public comment period, we will be submitting
> the license to the OSI for certification.
> I will also be discussing this license in my presentation at CopyleftConf
> on Monday.
> In the meantime, some of the underlying reasoning for why we need a
> different open source license is being presented on Holo's blog. The first
> post is up now, and the second will be up in a couple days:
> Comments are welcome.
> License-discuss mailing list
> License-discuss at lists.opensource.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the License-discuss