[License-review] OSI, legal conditions outside the "four corners" of the license, and PD/CC 0 [was Re: Can OSI specify that public domain is open source?]

[John Cowan]

Rick Moen scripsit:

> > Is it required that the author of a license submit it before OSI
> > evaluates it for approval?
> 
> I can't remember for sure.  Someone on the Board should speak to that. 
> My vague recollection is that the Board has in general made a tactical
> decision to not get roped into certification questions just because some
> net.random wanted a theoretical question decided and wanted to make work
> for others.  So, if I recall correctly, the Board expects either the
> author/stakeholder to submit it or for there to be some really
> compelling reason to consider it anyway.

The approval process at http://opensource.org/approval states clearly that
except in the case of a legacy license it is the license steward who
must propose the license.  When I proposed the MS-PL and MS-CL licenses,
I was asked to withdraw the proposal, on the grounds that if OSI had
changes to suggest, I wouldn't be able to communicate that effectively
back to Microsoft.  I did so.  Eventually, MS itself proposed them and
they were approved with changes.

-- 
John Cowan    http://ccil.org/~cowan    cowan at ccil.org
[T]here is a Darwinian explanation for the refusal to accept Darwin.
Given the very pessimistic conclusions about moral purpose to which his
theory drives us, and given the importance of a sense of moral purpose
in helping us cope with life, a refusal to believe Darwin's theory may
have important survival value. --Ian Johnston