[License-review] License Review Submission: Irrevocable MIT License (MIT-I)

[Josh Berkus]

On 8/15/25 09:18, Pamela Chestek wrote:
> 
> I am also troubled by "The Software may not be removed from public 
> repositories solely for the purpose of limiting access to versions 
> previously distributed under this license." I don't think it's a good 
> idea to start - what if it's taken down for security reasons? And you're 
> forcing someone to spend the resources to maintain a copy of software in 
> perpetuity, even if it's well past its useful life. I don't think 
> someone should be required to maintain a copy of the software.

This was the part where I was asking "can a license even compel this?"

It's one thing to say that the license is not revokable on already 
distributed copies of the software.  I think it's a bit redundant for 
the reasons Pam gives; even if the license is theoretically revokable, 
unless the revokation is automatic for reasons already documented in the 
license itself you're going to have a hard time actually carrying it 
out.  As far as I know, nobody has ever tried to do this; even with the 
various relicensings of database software, nobody has tried to claw back 
the old versions.

But, saying that the distributor must commit to distributing the 
software in perpetuity?  That seems like it goes well beyond copyright. 
Aside from being unrealistic.

-- 
Josh Berkus