[License-review] For Approval: Convertible Free Software License, Version 1.1 (C-FSL v1.1)

[Elmar Stellnberger]

I don`t see it as a discrimination if it is not the whole world who can 
re-license under a proprietary license. In a fact it is more just if 
those who have contributed the most to a software project have the 
responsibility to decide about re-licensing. Just consider what has 
happened to FreeBSD by Apple. Apple is using the BSD/Darwin kernel but 
did never give any contribution back to the FreeBSD project. To me this 
is an uprageing fact and the cause why BSD has never grown as popular as 
Linux has.

   Besides this the author always has the right to publish his work 
under another license (guaranteed by copyright law) at any time. This is 
not a discrimination either.

 > I know that the same practical effect would be achieved by assigning the
 > code to a single project, but that it's always an option for any forker,

   If the same effect can be achieved in another way then it can not be 
seen as a undue discrimination or as a discrimination per se.

   I don`t believe it is an infringement of an Open Source software if 
somebody can not re-license under a proprietary license so it should not 
apply with regards to OSS compliance.

   Last but not least I see paragraph #5 the way that it applies to 
discrimination against special groups of people with regards to equality 
or certain fields of endeavor. This is not the case - or can all people 
except the original author be seen as a special group?


On 9/26/18 11:22 AM, Carlo Piana wrote:
> Ellmar, all,
> 
> I remain quite puzzled by the main feature of the license, namely, the 
> right of *some* copyright holders in the initial work to decide on the 
> licensing of the *other* follow-on developers who are also copyright 
> holders. Isn't it a sort of discrimination, therefore against #5?
> 
> I know that the same practical effect would be achieved by assigning the 
> code to a single project, but that it's always an option for any forker, 
> not a legal effect of the license. Here you give up your rights on your 
> copyright as a condition of the very license, which does quite limit the 
> rights of some versus the rights of others.
> 
> My initial and non meditated reaction is that this license should be 
> rejected as long as Section 7 is concerned.
> 
> A remark on the need to retain the ability of relicense or to "make 
> business" (AKA proprietary exploit) with the software. That's achieved 
> with a liberal, non copyleft license. But restricting others from doing 
> something that the initial developers can do, siphoning in the formers' 
> code and copyright, that does not seem acceptable.

The group of original authors can be extended any time if someone gives 
a major contribution to a project under C-FSL. The only issue about it 
is that if someone is planning a major contribution he must communicate 
to do so before in order to make her/him accepted as original author.

> 
> Or am I mistaken on the working of the condition?
> 
> 
> Carlo
> 
> 
> 
> On 26/09/2018 09:57, Elmar Stellnberger wrote:
>> Full Name: Convertible Free Software License Version 1.1
>> Short Identifier: C-FSL v1.1
>> URL: https://www.elstel.org/license/C-FSL-v1.1.txt
>>
>> Rationale and Distinguish:
>> While the BSD license allows the whole world to re-license and while 
>> re-licensing is virtually impossible with GPL since every contributor 
>> would need to consent the C-FSL license goes a practical intermediate 
>> way restricting the right to re-license to a group called the original 
>> authors. That way open source developers are not excluded from making 
>> business with others who want to base a proprietary product on the 
>> given piece of open source software.
>>
>> Proliferation Category & Legal Review:
>> Other/Miscellaneous
>> A lawyer from the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency, USA) has 
>> already checked C-FSL for its proliferation properties. He has found 
>> the license to be compatible with other open source licenses. He 
>> decided that C-FSL can be used together with the CC0 license in the 
>> FDtool (functional dependency mining tool) project.
>>
>> list of software which uses C-FSL v1.1.:
>> qcoan: https://www.elstel.org/coan
>> xchroot, confinedrv, bundsteg, debcheckroot, dbschemacmd: also found 
>> at www.elstel.org
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> License-review mailing list
>> License-review at lists.opensource.org
>> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
>