[License-discuss] Status of earlier AFL licenses?

Wed Sep 8 19:55:32 UTC 2021

I'm almost certain a version before 3.0 (published in 2005) was on the OSI list before 2005, because I remember discussions about it on the License Proliferation Committee circa 2004.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin P. Fleming <kevin+osi at km6g.us>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2021 12:28 PM
> To: mccoy at lexpan.law; license-discuss at lists.opensource.org
> Cc: VM (Vicky) Brasseur <osi-lists at vmbrasseur.com>
> Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Status of earlier AFL licenses?
> 
> I don't understand how the licenses could no longer be 'valid', unless some
> sort of law or other external factor has made them so. They may be
> obsolete, superseded,  not recommended for use by their author/steward,
> etc., but their text is likely just as 'valid' today as when they were published.
> 
> McCoy's suggestion of placing them in the 'superseded' category seems
> correct, assuming they had ever been approved by OSI.
> 
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 2:58 PM McCoy Smith <mccoy at lexpan.law> wrote:
> >
> > This would be a relatively elementary task if the mailing list were more
> easily searchable....
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: VM (Vicky) Brasseur <osi-lists at vmbrasseur.com>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2021 11:45 AM
> > > To: mccoy at lexpan.law; license-discuss at lists.opensource.org
> > > Cc: lrosen at rosenlaw.com
> > > Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Status of earlier AFL licenses?
> > >
> > > That's the process I'm familiar with, but I also haven't been paying
> > > a lot of attention to it lately so my memory may be failing me there.
> > >
> > > Larry, could you please confirm whether those versions were
> > > OSI-approved when they _were_ valid?
> > >
> > > My guess is that they were, but I don't want to assume and the SPDX
> > > team can't find definitive proof either way.
> > >
> > > --V
> > >
> > > McCoy Smith wrote on 8/9/21 10:17:
> > > > I think the earlier versions, however, should be put in the "superseded"
> > > > category to capture any legacy uses? That's how others have been
> handled.
> > > >
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: Lawrence Rosen <lrosen at rosenlaw.com>
> > > >> Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2021 8:08 AM
> > > >> To: mccoy at lexpan.law; license-discuss at lists.opensource.org
> > > >> Cc: lrosen at rosenlaw.com
> > > >> Subject: RE: [License-discuss] Status of earlier AFL licenses?
> > > >>
> > > >> McCoy is correct. Versions of AFL and OSL **prior to version
> > > >> 3.0** are no longer valid. Please remove those earlier versions.
> > > >> /Larry
> > > >>
> > > >> Lawrence Rosen
> > > >> 707-478-8932
> > > >> 3001 King Ranch Rd., Ukiah, CA 95482
> > > >>
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: License-discuss
> > > >> <license-discuss-bounces at lists.opensource.org>
> > > >> On Behalf Of McCoy Smith
> > > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 9:56 PM
> > > >> To: license-discuss at lists.opensource.org
> > > >> Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Status of earlier AFL licenses?
> > > >>
> > > >> Since that's Larry Rosen's license, he'd probably know best. I
> > > >> talked to
> > > > him
> > > >> last week, should I ping him? I think he's on this list.
> > > >> I think what probably happened is the older versions got
> > > >> superseded in
> > > > favor
> > > >> of the newer versions, although typically that's shown in the
> > > >> superseded
> > > > list.
> > > >>
> > > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > > >>> From: License-discuss
> > > >>> <license-discuss-bounces at lists.opensource.org>
> > > >>> On Behalf Of VM (Vicky) Brasseur
> > > >>> Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 9:13 PM
> > > >>> To: license-discuss at lists.opensource.org
> > > >>> Subject: [License-discuss] Status of earlier AFL licenses?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Hi, folks!
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The SPDX folks are trying to sort out the status of the versions
> > > >>> of the Academic Free License prior to v3.0.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Basically, the Wayback Machine shows that the earlier versions
> > > >>> are
> > > >>> OSI- approved but they're not showing that way on the site anymore.
> > > >>> Searching the list archives didn't turn up any information that
> > > >>> would
> > > >> clear
> > > >>> things up.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Does anyone have any information about these?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> See this GitHub issue for details:
> > > >>> https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1327
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --V
> > > >>>
> > > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>> 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
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> 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
> > > > .ope
> > > > nsourc
> > > >> e.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > > > .ope
> > > > nsource.org
> > > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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.ope
> > nsource.org