[License-review] License Committee Report, March 2017

[Richard Fontana]

Reference is made to the previous report, 
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2017-January/002933.html
.

NASA Open Source Agreeement 2.0
===============================

I still have the open action to write up my concerns about the license
for consideration by the OSI board, which I am undertaking bearing in
mind the possibility that I have applied too strict a standard to this
license.


TOPPERS License (international)
=================================

To take further action on this license we need a translation by
someone independent of the license submitter, or, short of that, for
someone
independent of the license submitter to assess the fidelity of the
English-language version of TOPPERS to the Japanese original). If
anyone on this list is conversant in Japanese and would like to help
with this, let me know.


BSD + Patent License
====================

McCoy Smith recently revived discussion of this license. Although it
is short notice I am hoping McCoy may be able to submit a version for
OSI approval in time for the upcoming board meeting. 


Zentao Public License
=====================

As to this one, the OSI board still needs to discuss the issue of
whether badgeware in a contemporary license should be a per se
disqualification for OSI approval.


Upstream Compatibility License v1.0 (UCL-1.0)
=============================================

Nigel Tzeng drafted a revised version of the UCL [1] in which, as he
put it: "derivative works shall be dual licensed UCL and Apache rather
than requiring derivative works be licensed Apache only for upstream
contributors."

[1]
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2017-February/002980.html

If Nigel indicates he wishes to submit this version for OSI approval,
my recommendation is that it be approved.


European Space Agency Public Licenses (ESA-PL)
==============================================

Discussion has included some questions about sections 4.5 (obligation
to disclose patents) and 7 (obligations where there is knowledge of
infringement).

While I was inclined to recommend approval of these, in reviewing them,
I have a couple of concerns that had not occurred to me before and which
no one has brought up, so I am going
to recommend some further discussion. 


Octopus License
===============

This was in effect withdrawn by the submitter.