On 6/28/19 11:40 PM, Bruce Perens via License-discuss wrote: > > > 3. _A license that requires data portability_. > Section 2.3(b) obliges the user of a software to “provide to any > third party with which you have an enforceable legal agreement, a > no-charge copy … of the User Data in your possession in which that > third party has a Lawful Interest ….” The license submitter > confirmed in this sequence of emails that the intent of this > provision is to expand the scope of software freedom: > > http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2019-May/004123.html > > <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2019-May/004123.html> > > http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2019-May/004124.html > > <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2019-May/004124.html> > > http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2019-May/004126.html > > <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2019-May/004126.html> > > The members of the License Review Committee do not agree whether > this is appropriate for an open source license. It therefore > requires extensive additional public discussion before the OSI > will be able to reach a conclusion on this point. > > > It's my opinion that this is out of scope for an Open Source license. > My argument is on the record above and I'm glad to elaborate. I think > Arthur (Van's customer) could explain what he wants to do with this > and why he thinks it's important. But even if I end up approving of > the sentiment, so far I think it would remain out of scope for an OSI > approved Open Source license. Of course, you don't need OSI's approval > to use any license you wish. >
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
