[License-review] Approval: OIN License (Open Innovation License)
Kevin P. Fleming
kevin+osi at km6g.us
Sun Dec 27 17:43:01 UTC 2020
While there are clearly a lot of challenges with this license, it is
rather difficult to draw any conclusions from the wording when it uses
unusual combinations of words. I'm sure this is due to natural
language differences, but since the license is written in English it
will need to be understandable to a reader of common English.
Specifically, I've never seen the phrase 'at goodwill' used before,
and I can't find any evidence of it being in common use (or even in
uncommon use), so I really can't speculate what is meant by "This is
at goodwill." (It doesn't help that there is a large organization in
the USA called "Goodwill" so searching for things which are unrelated
to it is challenging..)
Please try to explain what you intend 'at goodwill' to mean. Thanks.
On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 12:32 PM Andrew Nassief <kamalandrew55 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, the Chinese government monitors all network packets of people's IP included distributed software. Lots of open source software is specifically illegal in a communist regime and one would state that likely all the OSI and definition of OSD wouldn't pass the Chinese dissent test.
> This is at goodwill. Morally restrictive is different then being legally restrictive. Making technology that isn't intentionally built to harm humanity to the best of your knowledge is a very low bar of moral accountability. That is the lowest of the bar.
> If people build technology for the sake of human enslavement or harm, then eventually you will have no OSI and the definition of free software at that point is meaningless.
> Moral restrictive and personal reasoning aren't within the context of the law and this would require OSI to further explain and expand their definition much further in ways that allow them to be both for and against free software.
> Anyways I notice most people rather veto before hearing my license by license analysis. I am obviously not trying to waste everybody's time and not welcomed much by this community.
> Inspiring a moral objective of ethics is a good thing that needs to be talked about in tech. You can twist the extent of discrimination to state that people against the distribution of free and open source software is making OSI in violation of rule #6. Anybody can find logical fallacies for rejection in pretty much anything.
> Anyways I plan on providing the license by license analysis quite soon.
> The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Communication from the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
More information about the License-review