[License-review] Approval: Server Side Public License, Version 1 (SSPL v1)

Rick Moen rick at linuxmafia.com
Sat Nov 10 09:35:23 UTC 2018

Quoting Kyle Mitchell (kyle at kemitchell.com):

> Moreover, to your later point, why does any of this matter?  The
> license isn't licensor-specific.  Anyone could choose it for new work.

Indeed, I've always felt it was near-sighted to evaluate licences solely
as instruments of their authors' agendas, as ultimately the licence
stands or falls on its own merit.

Nonetheless, as Mr. Horowitz cited what he claimed was a rationale for
the licence's genesis, it seems more than fair to comment if, as with
me, that does not seem to meet the sniff test.

> Apart from its position as license steward, of what particular
> relevance is MongoDB, Inc., among licensors?  Was AGPL approved
> because reviewers approved of Affero?  Because they approved of
> Funambol?

Counselor, you would perhaps have a point if the witness had alleged
that the merit of a licence should be judged according ot the merits of
the proposer, but the witness did not say that, so you can park the

> There are no copyleft principles, any more than there are screwdriver
> principles.  Copyleft is just a tool.

A distinction without a difference.

Mr. Mitchell, I have very limited time and patience for refuting your 
ankle-biting on small irrelevant points while sidestep my large ones
like SSPL's enormous OSD #9 problem.  I believe I made my point clearly
enough; I stand by it.

Cheers,                       "There are no bad regiments, only bad colonels."
Rick Moen                                       -- Napoleon Bonaparte (attr.)
rick at linuxmafia.com
McQ! (4x80)

More information about the License-review mailing list