[License-review] Approval: Open Innovation License v2.0

[Andrew Nassief]

Lots of people just seem a bit passive aggressive on the nature of this
subject. OSI is a non-profit business entity. It is within the board's
legal right to reject a license even if it complies with OSD. I know that.
I feel like this new variation is compliant, and haven't got enough
feedback as to why it is not. However, I'm okay w/ moving this to
license-discuss if you find that as a more fit medium to seek feedback in
regards to the revised version.

On Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 6:31 PM Joshua R. Simmons <josh.simmons at opensource.org>
wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thanks for your submission. I've been following the discussion and now
> seems like a good time for me to jump in.
>
> Given the discussion here suggests we're a long way from consensus, you
> may find the License Discuss list to be a more appropriate forum.
>
> The License Review process is highly time consuming and relies on the
> generosity of volunteers from the community. Many of those same people
> chime in on License Discuss.
>
> You may find that heeding their earnest feedback will go a long way toward
> retaining an audience that's willing to help, and indeed, may find that it
> also brings you closer to producing a license worthy of adoption.
>
> Hope that helps ☺️
>
> Wishing everyone happy holidays and all the best for the New Year!
>
> Yours,
> Josh
>
> Josh Simmons (he/him), President, Open Source Initiative
> @joshsimmons | josh.simmons at opensource.org | 1-707-600-6098
> | bluesomewhere on Freenode
> ad astra per aspera 🚀
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020, 15:19 Andrew Nassief <kamalandrew55 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi, the problem is people are trying to talk about the legal standing or
>> definitions of the words of the mission statement even though I have
>> explicitly made it as a preamble, applied my entity to it so it reads out
>> as non-contractual, and have the word believes instead of agrees. Hiring
>> someone shouldn't be a requirement in order to get a license approved,
>> especially if you are contempt with the wording of the licensing.
>>
>> Anyways this is my version 2.0, I'm hoping to seek contributor feedback
>> on this. I'm not trying to upset everybody. I'm just looking for feedback
>> regarding this specific license. I'm severely autistic so I don't know if I
>> come off as too extreme or irritating to everybody in this board, but I'm
>> just seeking out discussion in regards to approval as I believe I have at
>> least put effort into fixing some of your main issues.
>> The Open Innovation License
>>
>> *Version 2, 28th December 2020*
>> *Copyright © 2020 Stark Drones Corporation*
>> *Copyright © 2020 Andrew Magdy Kamal*
>> Preamble
>>
>> The *Stark Drones Corporation* believes in building or releasing
>> technology for the betterment of humanity. Technology should not be meant
>> with the intention of harming a human being. We believe in a prima facie
>> moral duty through personal moral obligation to understand that technology
>> should be within the concept of moral good or outcomes that are morally
>> right and/or ethical. We believe in promoting the advancement of humanity
>> and civilization as a whole. We believe in a sense of adventurement,
>> edification, and the expansion of the human mind.
>>
>> *Released under the Open Innovation License*
>>
>> *Copyright © (YEAR) (Copyright Holder)*
>>
>> This project is licensed under the *Open Innovation License*. This means
>> any code, file, diagrams, data format, or other innovation containing this
>> license within it can be copied, modified, redistributed, published, or
>> even used for non and/or commercial purposes within the context of this
>> license.
>> Any code, file, diagrams, data format, or other innovation containing
>> this license is understood to be fully "AS IS", no claims are made in
>> regards to safety, security, warranty, usability, or other form of
>> merchantability and market-readiness. In no events are copyright holders,
>> authors, or publishers are to be held liable for any claims, damage or
>> results from usage of what have been licensed under this license.
>>
>> The context of this license includes: Keeping this original license text
>> and file verbatim, as well as the copyright notice included in any
>> redistribution of said project. Project is defined as what is using this
>> license. For purposes of context, the copyright notice after the preamble
>> is meant to be modified for whomsoever publishes or releases "any code,
>> file, diagrams, data format, or other innovation", so that they can include
>> their information.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20201228/70d2244c/attachment-0001.html>