[License-review] CC withdrawl of CC0 from OSI process

Simon Phipps simon at webmink.com
Sat Feb 25 13:49:27 UTC 2012

On Feb 25, 2012 1:45 PM, "Clark C. Evans" <cce at clarkevans.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012, at 01:38 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
> | I completely agree. Given the license appears to be OSD
> | compatible to most eyes, and that the cases where it's argued
> | it's not appear to be outside the scope of all OSI decisions
> | to date, I would rather see CC0 as it stands now approved so
> | that OSI's list includes a public domain dedication.
> In this case, the OSI should also approve a MIT derivative
> with an additional term that says that patents are explicitly
> *excluded* from the grant.   Christopher said the patent
> exclusion in the CC0 was deliberate because those who would
> use the CC0 *have* patents relevant to the material being
> released under the CC0 and do not wish to also grant them.
> The OSI should instead focus on a 10-15 line "MIT" style
> copyright *and* patent public domain dedication and approve
> this.  The FSF would approve it and recommend it over the
> CC0 I'm quite sure.  If it is short & sweet, it'll spread
> very rapidly by those who are truly making a gift.

Since "the OSI" doesn't write licenses, this will only happen if someone
who does write licenses thinks it through with support from legal
professionals and then submits it for approval.  I believe that's what
Christopher has said  CC will do, just not straight away.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20120225/83259c2b/attachment.html>

More information about the License-review mailing list