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

[Carlo Piana]

I have already expressed the opinion that since OSI approval is a scarce resource and it only must go to licenses that, besides not violating the OSD, meet certain minimum requirements to justify an examination, such as a scorecard where all elements weigh in to justify an approval. 

Here I don't see sufficient quality to justify an approval, on suspects that requiring positive distribution of the code even past the time the actual binary is also distributed (a basic tenet of copyleft) is even against OSD. 

Plus the language is suboptimal from a legal standpoint and would create a lot of uncertainty. 

I don't see any statement indicating that it is actually being used or there is a bona fide expectation to be used by any substantial projects in due course, pending approval. While this should not be a requirement for approving a new license, it is a point that must be evaluated when deciding whether to begin the approval process. Otherwise, there is a risk of receiving a flood of thought exercise licenses, which would create unnecessary noise.

This license scores low IMHO, on the above concerns.

K 


----- Messaggio originale -----
> Da: "Kevin P. Fleming" <lists.osi-license-review at kevin.km6g.us>
> A: "license-review at lists.opensource.org" <license-review at lists.opensource.org>
> Inviato: Sabato, 16 agosto 2025 13:03:07
> Oggetto: Re: [License-review] License Review Submission: Irrevocable MIT License (MIT-I)

> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, at 22:12, Pamela Chestek wrote:
>> Requirements like this are why it just impossible for the OSI to
>> describe everything that makes a license unacceptable, because there's
>> no limit to the human imagination. Instead it is, I think rightly,
>> within the OSI's discretion to make the judgment call based on a
>> holistic view of whether the license advances or inhibits the adoption
>> and use of open source software.
> 
> +1000 to that.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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