[License-discuss] Generic process for removing approved licenses. Re: REMOVE AAL from list of approved licenses

Henrik Ingo henrik.ingo at avoinelama.fi
Wed Apr 1 18:13:49 UTC 2020

On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 8:33 PM McCoy Smith <mccoy at lexpan.law> wrote:

> 4. Licenses that are redundant with more popular licenses [Several licenses
> in this group are excellent licenses and have their own followings, however
> these licenses were perceived by the License Proliferation Committee as
> completely or partially redundant with existing licenses.]
> 6. Superseded licenses [Licenses in this category have been superseded by
> newer versions.]
> 7. Licenses that have been voluntarily retired [Self-defining category. No
> one should use these licenses going forward, although we assume that
> licensors may or may not choose to continue to use them.]
> I suppose one could create a supraset called "Deprecated Licenses"
> comprising subsets consisting of 4, 6 and 7 above, although you'd get some
> controversy about adding category 4 to that supraset, as some of the
> authors
> of licenses in category 4 do not believe that their licenses ought to be
> considered redundant and would likely object even more if their license
> were
> categorized as deprecated.
For the purposes of this discussion, I think it's really important to
distinguish between "this license is perfectly open source but we generally
recommend sticking with a small set of well known licenses" and "this
license is not open source after all".

henrik.ingo at avoinelama.fi
+358-40-5697354        skype: henrik.ingo            irc: hingo

My LinkedIn profile: http://fi.linkedin.com/pub/henrik-ingo/3/232/8a7
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20200401/88caf8cb/attachment.html>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list