[License-discuss] Improvement to the License-Review Process

Simon Phipps simon at webmink.net
Thu Aug 27 19:06:03 UTC 2020

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 7:51 PM Florian Weimer <fw at deneb.enyo.de> wrote:

> * Andrew DeMarsh:
> >>
> >> Quite a few people view such a requirement in a software license as
> >> DFSG-noncompliant.  I think it would be a bit odd if OSI adopted such
> >> a requirement within its contribution process.
> >>
> >
> > I'm not sure that it would be required in the license text itself
> possibly
> > only interacting with the mailing list review, I am confused as to which
> > DFSG guideline this would run afoul, (Possibly 5?) could you elaborate?
> I think the most common interpretation is that outlawing anonymous
> changes is an implicit restriction on field of endeavor (because you
> cannot modify the software in a context in which you want to stay
> anonymous for reasons of personal safety, say).

That's confusing the license itself with the process of approval. A license
that tried to prevent anonymous use or improvement of the software would be
clearly non-conformant, but requiring either a real-world identity or a
stable and well-used online pseudo identity from license submitters would
not affect later users of the license itself if approved.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20200827/3b952a18/attachment.html>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list