[License-review] veto against Unlicence

[Pamela Chestek]

There are lots of lawyers on the list; if any thought that the position
had merit I would have expected that person to pipe up. Given that it's
a position that appears to be held by one person, and that no one else,
lawyer and non-lawyer alike, has expressed support for (only musing
about what the theory might possibly be), and there have been a number
of logical arguments why it can't be true, I don't see paying someone as
a good use of financial resources. We manage to sort out all the other
legal tangles without paying a lawyer.

Fedora considers it acceptable:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Good_Licenses
The FSF finds it acceptable and compatible with the GNU GPL:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#Unlicense

I'm not jumping off a cliff because others have, but then they appear to
have landed safely.

Pam

Pamela S. Chestek
Chestek Legal
PO Box 2492
Raleigh, NC 27602
919-800-8033
pamela at chesteklegal.com
www.chesteklegal.com

On 5/15/2020 10:25 AM, Eric Schultz wrote:


> May I propose that we could end this discussion if OSI could pay for
> an hour or two of an open source-experienced European copyright
> attorney's time?
>
> It seems to be in OSI's interest to not promote a license that may
> have a pitfall in it and, while the discussion has been passionate and
> well-intentioned, it all seems to obscure the fact that none of us
> seem to really know the answer.
>
> Eric 
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2020, 8:32 AM Pamela Chestek <pamela at chesteklegal.com
> <mailto:pamela at chesteklegal.com>> wrote:
>
>
>     On 5/15/2020 9:27 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
>>
>>
>>     On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 1:34 PM Langley, Stuart
>>     <Stuart.Langley at disney.com <mailto:Stuart.Langley at disney.com>> wrote:
>>
>>          
>>         The issue this creates is that the author can’t make a valid
>>         transfer to the public domain.  Transfers are not allowed. 
>>         The author’s completely clear and unambiguous intent to
>>         transfer does not change that. The only option is to license
>>         sufficient rights.  Without a license, even if the author
>>         does not assert copyright, their heirs might.
>>
>>
>>     OSI has previously advised that "public domain" does not qualify
>>     as open source because exactly this sort of issue, varying in
>>     scope and consequence globally, prevents developers from being
>>     sure they have the necessary rights without consulting another
>>     person first. See https://opensource.org/node/878
>     The difference with the Unlicense is that it /also/ clearly states
>     what rights are granted. Does that not resolve any concern with
>     the Unlicense?
>
>     Pam
>
>
>     Pamela S. Chestek
>     Chestek Legal
>     PO Box 2492
>     Raleigh, NC 27602
>     919-800-8033
>     pamela at chesteklegal.com <mailto:pamela at chesteklegal.com>
>     www.chesteklegal.com <http://www.chesteklegal.com>
>     _______________________________________________
>     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 <http://opensource.org> email address.
>
>     License-review mailing list
>     License-review at lists.opensource.org
>     <mailto: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/20200515/2ffdf9f0/attachment.html>