[License-review] Approval request for ZENTAO PUBLIC LICENSE

[Josh berkus]

On 06/21/2016 12:19 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
> Possibly. One problem is that an earlier incarnation of the OSI approved
> a license that would probably have to be considered a badgeware license:
> https://opensource.org/licenses/CPAL-1.0
> 
> This license was drafted to address concerns that were raised in the OSI
> community regarding earlier badgeware licenses. Nonetheless I think it
> fits your definition of badgeware.
> 

Well, there's two things I can see doing here.

1) The CPAL license offers a lot of flexibility in the badgeware
requirement; clauses 14a-d have quite a few limitations, not the least
of which is:

"	If Exhibit B does not include any Attribution Information, then there
are no requirements for You to display any Attribution Information of
the Original Developer."

Comparatively, ZENTAO is quite inflexible, to the point where it's
effectively a domain restriction:

"3.5 You must keep all the indications of the software when providing
applications

to your users.

3.6 None of the indications of the software may be removed, hidden or
obscured

in any way when you provide applications to your users."

So take the case where the Original Work is a GUI application, and I
want to use some of its code in a non-GUI application.  Under Zentao,
that would be impossible.

So it fails on that count; it would need to include at least the
accomodations embraced by the CAPL.

2) We can also take the stance (as is my personal opinion) that we are
not approving any *new* badgeware licenses.

--Josh Berkus