[License-review] License Committee Report

[Josh Berkus]

On 10/13/2015 03:56 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
> Free Public License 1.0.0
> =========================

> OSI has approved thought-experiment licenses before (e.g. the SimPL)
> as well as licenses that were not used prior to OSI approval (e.g. the
> UPL). I am not sure how to distinguish the Free Public License from
> the SimPL (though I am not sure the present-day OSI would be as happy
> to approve it) or the UPL. Or rather I *do*, but it would somehow be
> to point out that Christian Bundy (evidently, judging from his
> LinkedIn profile, a web developer who graduated from high school in
> 2011) is not a law professor (like Bob Gemulkiewicz) or a former legal
> counsel and present or former executive at at a major IT company (like
> Gemulkiewicz and Jim Wright).

What about a non-proliferation objection?  That is, does the FPL offer
anything which can not already be accomplished with either the SimPL or CC0?

If you're moving towards approval on this one, then some legal mind
needs to review its provisions for applicability.  Specifically, the
license claims that its terms apply even when no copy of the license is
present, or even if no copy has been present for several generations of
copying.  The lawyers on this list who reviewed that provision found it
legally dubious, which means that before approval it needs additional
legal review.

--Josh Berkus