[License-discuss] Certifying MIT-0

Richard Fontana rfontana at redhat.com
Thu Apr 23 02:12:08 UTC 2020

Hi Tobie,

There was a thread on license-review about MIT-0 in December, beginning here:
It was never submitted for approval, but apparently it was
inadvertently listed as OSI-approved on the SPDX license list, which
has since been corrected.


On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 9:48 PM Tobie Langel <tobie at unlockopen.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> The MIT-0 license[1] is an MIT license with the attribution clause removed. It has notably been used to license example and scaffolding code.
> It doesn’t look that it has been approved by the OSI. I couldn’t find it on the licenses page[2].
> I imagine that is has been discussed on license-review@ already, unfortunately I couldn’t find a way to search the archives either. A pointer would be very much appreciated.
> If this license hasn’t been rejected in the past, would there be a chance for it to be accepted? It seems like it meets the OSD and fulfills a need that’s hard to meet otherwise.
> If so, could I bring it to license-review@ myself given I’m neither a lawyer nor the author of the license?
> Thanks all for your help,
> —tobie
> —-
> [1]
> https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT-0.html
> [2] https://opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical
> _______________________________________________
> The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
> License-discuss mailing list
> License-discuss at lists.opensource.org
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org

Richard Fontana
Senior Commercial Counsel
Red Hat, Inc.
+1 212 689-4350 (mobile)

More information about the License-discuss mailing list