[License-review] Octopus License

[dialog purpose]

Octopus License is different from other licenses, because:

1- It makes clear that THE AUTHORS AND DISTRIBUTORS HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO
PROVIDE MAINTENANCE, SUPPORT, UPDATES, ENHANCEMENTS, OR MODIFICATIONS.
(most other licenses don't).

2- It makes clear that re-licensing is granted.

3- It mentions that all files associated with the software fall under the
license unless explicitly disclaimed in individual files.

4- It has this statement, No written agreement, license, or royalty fee is
required for any of the authorized uses.

5- Other permissive licenses are all short and not clear enough, but
Octopus License is.

6- It grants placing warranty, all other permissive licenses don't.

7- it grants everyone to copyright their derived work.




On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:51 PM, Josh berkus <josh at postgresql.org> wrote:

> On 12/22/2016 10:39 AM, dialog purpose wrote:
> > It is different from MIT, ISC, BSD, UoI/NCSA Open Source License
>
> You need to explain *how* it's different, and why those differences are
> important and needed in the OSS ecosystem.
>
> --Josh Berkus
>
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at opensource.org
> https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20161222/e6466e57/attachment.html>