[License-discuss] Request Discussion Pre-Reviews For New Licenses (chewkeanho-rlos, chewkeanho-cos, chewkeanho-gpos)

Sat Oct 5 20:50:39 UTC 2024

Pamela brings up an important issue that I don't believe the OSI has been
willing to deal with.

The amateur approaching the development of a license is sort of like
someone who has just learned their first programming language applying to
develop microcode for CPUs. There is a lot about it the neophyte isn't
aware of yet. We're supposed to be welcoming on this list, which I failed
to do with one recent neophyte, and obviously Pamela said as much as she
could within the conduct boundaries.

But IMO there should be some sort of gateway.

    Thanks

    Bruce

On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 6:52 AM Pamela Chestek <pamela at chesteklegal.com>
wrote:

> I have not read these licenses in detail because the are extremely long,
> approximately 4500 words, appear from the definitions alone to have way
> more detail than a typical open source license, and are not understandable,
> e.g., this paragraph:
>
> Should the Covenant is under version controlled; except when a valid and
> specific
> version is explicitly reproduced either through the locally available
> Covenant Notice file
> or declared and reproduced by the Product itself in which that version
> shall be enforced;
> the latest and greatest version of the entire Covenant of its
> understanding, proposals,
> representations, and warranties relating to the subject matter shall, with
> prejudice,
> prevail, be enforced, and superseding all previous versions.
>
> "Should ... is under ... controlled" is not grammatically correct and
> therefore the meaning isn't clear. A term like "latest and greatest" cannot
> be construed - what if the latest version isn't also the "greatest"
> version, and "greatest" on what vector? It is unnecessarily verbose -
> "understanding, proposals, representations, and warranties," "prevail, be
> enforced, and superseding."
>
> That is just the first operative paragraph and a brief scan shows that the
> clarity does not improve from there.
>
> The licenses include "services," but open source licenses are for
> software, not for services. There also appear to be other areas covered
> that are inappropriate for a software-only license, such as personal
> information.
>
> Your license does not grant rights to trade secrets; this would likely be
> considered not compliant with the OSD. It also doesn't make sense for an
> open source license - what possible trade secret can there be in published
> code?
>
> Writing licenses, and particularly open source licenses, is a highly
> specialized skill. In my opinion, these licenses would not be approved in
> their present form and would also require a great deal of work by a skilled
> open source lawyer before approaching anything that might be acceptable. I
> don't think it would be worthwhile even to try to edit them, it would be
> simpler to start from scratch.
>
>
> Pamela S. Chestek (in my personal capacity)
> Chestek Legal
> 300 Fayetteville St.
> Unit 2492
> Raleigh, NC 27602
> +1 919-800-8033
> pamela at chesteklegal
> www.chesteklegal.com
> On 9/30/2024 2:58 AM, (Holloway) Chew, Kean Ho via License-discuss wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Wish you a lovely day. Complying to
> https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process process, I wish to invite
> everyone here to discuss and pre-review my newly drafted open-source
> licenses not just for software but also general intellectual properties
> usage before submitting to license-review mailing list.
>
> The main goal is to create a new set of license frameworks which does not
> require issuing multiple outbound licenses (e.g. Apache 2.0 for software,
> CC-BY-ND for images, CC-BY-SA for video, ...) for a single project
> repository and picked up the latest updates in the market implementations.
>
> What was mainly updated:
>
>    1. Changed Software to Product so that the license can be expanded to
>    non-software product licensing usage (e.g. graphics, video, manufacturing
>    design, audio, etc) without needing to spin multiple outbound licenses; AND
>    2. Added license assignment, ratification, and tenure section to
>    specify when and how is the license applied; AND
>    3. Added version controlled clauses for which version shall be in
>    effect by default; AND
>    4. Added artificial intelligence training dataset usage clauses; AND
>    5. Added Sensitive Data warranty and liability coverage; AND
>    6. Added global vendors (e.g. datacenter) Sensitive Data limitation of
>    liability; AND
>    7. Added force manjure limitation of liability; AND
>    8. Added global vendors (e.g. datacenter) Sensitive Data limitation of
>    liability; AND
>    9. Added judiciary minimal damage values limitation of liability; AND
>    10. Expanded grant clauses into Creative Commons' rights categories;
>    11. AND Added geographical indicator coverage; AND
>    12. Added protected geographical indicator coverage; AND
>    13. Added protected designation indicator coverage; AND
>    14. Added industrial design use coverage; AND
>    15. Added integrated circuit layout design use coverage; AND
>    16. Added trade secret use coverage.
>
> ----
>
> There are 4 sets of licenses (3 are open-source):
>
> (1) chewkeanho-rlos
> A libre-like license similar to BSD3-Clear but reserves registered IPs
> (patent, etc) back to the owner.
>
> Primary license source: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13777226
> Backup license source: https://github.com/ChewKeanHo/license-rlos
>
>
> (2) chewkeanho-cos
> An Apache 2.0-like license where registered IPs are granting use licenses
> by default.
>
> Primary license source: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13788522
> Backup license source: https://github.com/ChewKeanHo/license-cos
>
>
> (3) chewkeanho-gpos
> A GPLv2-like general public license. Functions like a backhole open-source
> that makes everything general public and forcing upstream. Copyleft
> boundaries designations (where its effects shall stop) are included and
> warning notice is on the cover page in case of excited junior executives.
>
> Primary license source: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13825030
> Backup license source: https://github.com/ChewKeanHo/license-gpos
>
>
> (4) chewkeanho-proprietary
> A fallback, safety first, designed specifically for junior executives in
> case of mishaps. The goal is that, when a project is generated, this shall
> be the default license (where everything is locked up). Just in case a
> junior accidentally "open" the project, the proprietary license effect is
> still there where any senior / legal executive can fire-fight the
> situation. The project can be re-licensed into the other open-source
> licenses once the embargo is cleared by the business unit.
>
> IMPORTANT: This is not an open-source license but is listed here for
> reference as the other licenses are inter-relate with each other.
>
> Primary license source: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13767361
> Backup license source: https://github.com/ChewKeanHo/license-proprietary
>
> ----
>
> Proposed SPDX identifier:
> Recommended: **chewkeanho-Xos** (X is the type like c, gp, rl) since there
> is a version control clause so the stewards can update the primary license
> without backfiring the older versions.
> If version locked is required: **chewkeanho-Xos-5-and-above** (where
> version 5 is reserved and shall includes the feedback from OSI)
>
> Supported languages: English
>
> Available file formats: (1) PDF - for legal folks; AND (2) RTF - for
> Microsoft MSI packager; (3) TXT - for Unix packager (e.g. debian package)
>
> Source redundancies: (1) Zenodo - in the EU that issued the common DOI;
> AND (2) GitHub, in the US.
>
> ----
>
> Feedbacks & amendments are welcome. Version 4 is reserved for OSI feedback
> and improvement for externals.
>
> Site-note: if possible, please let me issue PDF for each iteration. the
> TXT requires manual formatting (to make it human readable friendly) which
> is very time consuming. If possible, I would like the TXT formatting to be
> done only after finalization.
>
> Thank you for your time.
>
>
> Regards,
> (Holloway) Chew, Kean Ho
> *Justus Dominus*
> 202403160286 (003613489-T)
> W: https://www.hollowaykeanho.com
> E: me at hollowaykeanho.com | hollowaykeanho at gmail.com
> ------------------------------
> If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete all copies. The sender shall not be held liable for any
> damages, losses, or expenses of any kind arising from the use of or
> reliance on the contents of this email herein. If the contents of this
> email are digitally and cryptographically signed by a GNU Privacy Guard
> (GnuPG) key, please seek out the public key with the sender email available
> at: *https://www.hollowaykeanho.com/pubkey.gpg
> <https://www.hollowaykeanho.com/pubkey.gpg>*
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 listLicense-discuss at lists.opensource.orghttp://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.opensource.org
>

-- 
Bruce Perens K6BP
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20241005/456ea33e/attachment-0001.htm>