I have failed to communicate my point clearly enough. I am not saying that OSI is precluded from any particular helpful-to-lawyers activity. Helping lawyers can very well be valuable to the OSI.
It's a matter of how choices are made as to what actions OSI decides to undertake. Unlike what a trade association might do, OSI is not operating in the service of those entities or individuals who might choose to use particular licenses or otherwise engage in activities relating to open source software. OSI could (as it has) conclude that it should undertake various actions to aid lawyers in crafting licenses. However, OSI need not need to choose to do something because lawyers would find it helpful. Helping lawyers is one thing; the OSI does this. License creation efficiency maximization is another; a trade association might do this. Section 1. GENERAL PURPOSES. This corporation is a nonprofit public benefit corporation and is not organized for the private gain of any person. It is organized under the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law for public educational purposes. Section 2. SPECIFIC PURPOSES. Within the context of the general purposes stated above, this corporation shall: (1) educate the public about the advantages of open source software; (2) encourage the software community to participate in open source software development; (3) identify how software users’ objectives are best served through open source software; (4) persuade organizations and software authors to distribute source software freely they otherwise would not distribute; (5) provide resources for sharing information about open source software and licenses; (6) assist attorneys to craft open source licenses; (7) manage a program to allow use of one or more marks in association with open source software licenses; and (8) advocate for open source principles. -- Scott On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 2:24 PM VanL <van.lindb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Respectfully, I disagree. The purposes of the OSI, per the bylaws, are: > > Section 2. *SPECIFIC PURPOSES.* Within the context of the general > purposes stated above, this corporation shall: (1) educate the public about > the advantages of open source software; (2) encourage the software > community to participate in open source software development; (3) identify > how software users’ objectives are best served through open source > software; (4) persuade organizations and software authors to distribute > source software freely they otherwise would not distribute; (5) provide > resources for sharing information about open source software and licenses; > *(6) > assist attorneys to craft open source licenses; *(7) manage a program to > allow use of one or more marks in association with open source software > licenses; and (8) advocate for open source principles. > > Doesn't this specific purpose of the organization suggest "it would be > important for the organization to have detailed processes by which > determinations are made, and it could make sense for the organization to > actively create guidance that makes clear how the latest factors of current > interest in the industry affect how products will fit with respect to the > lines around the definition"? > > Are not those the exact things that would "assist attorneys to craft open > source licenses"? > > Thanks, > Van > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > License-discuss@lists.opensource.org > > http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org >
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
