[License-discuss] For Public Comment: The Cryptographic Autonomy License

[Bruce Perens]

*As reigning honcho of the Open Source Initiative, I have come to oppress
your license :-)*


*First, would you please discuss whether there is a sufficient public
performance right for software defined in 17 USC 106 (4), (5) and (6)? I
read your discussion of Public Performance and was not enlightened.*
*I'm going to discuss a number of things that aren't necessarily blockers
for approval, because you've asked for opinions on license quality, etc.*









*...Conditioned on compliance with section 2, and subject to the
reservations of section 1.2, you have the world-wide, royalty-free,
non-exclusive permission to:Take any action with the Work or a Modified
Work that would infringe the copyright or database protection laws of an
Applicable Jurisdiction applying to the Work, including Publicly Performing
any interface derived from the Work; andTake any action with the Work or a
Modified Work that would infringe any patent claims Licensable by Licensor,
to the extent that those claims are embodied in the Work as distributed by
Licensor.**It strikes me that the above grant is incomplete, in that there
will be additional necessary rights separate from copyright and patent in
various jurisdictions, such as moral rights, mask rights, broadcast rights,
etc. For assurance that the grant is sufficient and will survive changes in
venue and evolution of law, you should make a general grant of other
necessary rights excluding trademark. *











*Limitations on GrantsThe permissions in Section 1.1 are the only
permissions granted under this license. The following reservations
apply:Licensor does not grant any patent license for Code that the Licensor
has removed from the Work.Licensor does not grant any patent license for
claims that are only infringed due to the modification of the Work or the
combination of the Work, directly or indirectly, with any other component,
including other Software or hardware.Licensor does not grant any license to
the trademarks, service marks, or logos of Licensor, except to the extent
necessary i) to comply with the attribution conditions in section 2.1 of
this License; and ii) to describe a Modified Work as being compatible or
not compatible with the Work.*

*I think this works better as a positive grant:Each Licensor grants the
right to exercise their patent claims that are necessarily infringed by
each version of the software which that Licensor has licensed, distributed,
made available, modified, or performed.*

...

*You may not use the Software to control any cryptographic keys, seeds, or
hashes pertaining to third parties where such control would prevent the
third party from independently exercising the permissions granted under
this License;*

*This is problematic in that DRM is often implemented using other software
than "the Software", for example the operating system, or is implemented
with hardware. And as written this is a use restriction on the software.
And it's too specific regarding the means. How about:*

*You may not use technical means to prevent the third party from
independently exercising the permissions granted under this License.*

*You must waive any legal power to forbid circumvention of technical
protection measures that include use of the Work; and*

*You must disclaim any intention to limit operation or modification of the
Work as a means of enforcing the legal rights of third parties against
Recipients.*

*Other than the conditions requiring You to a) provide Recipients no-charge
access to the Source Code of the Work or a Modified Work, and b) provide a
copy at no charge of any User Data in Your possession to legally-engaged
third parties having a Lawful Interest in the User Data, nothing in this
License requires You to provide processing services to anyoneany Recipient
or any other third party.*

*Combined Work Exception*

*As an exception to the conditions in sections 2.2.1 and 2.2.2, any Source
Code marked by the Licensor as having the “Combined Work Exception,” or any
Object Code created from Source Code so marked, may be combined with other
Software into a larger work, and the resulting larger work may be licensed
under any other termsused, distributed, or sold under any other license, so
long as You: a) comply with the notice conditions of section 2.1; b) comply
with the distribution conditions of 2.2.1 and 2.2.2, relative to the Source
Code provided to You; and c) comply with section 2.3.*

*I don't understand why you add this complexity rather than simply allowing
creators of modifications to license their modifications separately, as
independent works. Is it because they may be derivative?*

*    Thanks*

*    Bruce*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190316/e9d460e6/attachment-0001.html>