[License-review] License Committee report

[Smith, McCoy]

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: License-review [mailto:license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fontana
>>Sent: Monday, November 12, 2018 3:37 AM
>>To: license-review at lists.opensource.org
>>Subject: [License-review] License Committee report

>>License Zero Reciprocal Public License

<snip>
>>Each of these drafts was discussed pretty extensively on license-review, with active involvement of the license submitter. To the extent that there was any consensus view, I would say it was negative (McCoy Smith described it as "neutral to negative - though hard to >>see where the consensus landed"

That wasn't exactly scientific data collection, but there were a few people beyond the license submitters for LZPL & SSPL who were saying there should be room for experimentation around copyleft and that those licenses would qualify as such (and thought that one should not take into consideration the potential business model that the authors intend to use those licenses for, which I'm sympathetic to).  I think more people had negative reactions to the licenses, either on OSD compliance issues, drafting ambiguity issues, or overall philosophical or legal issues.
I for one see LZPL and SSPL as very similar in the issues they raise in those areas and think they should be probably get an up or down decision together.