On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 7:51 PM Florian Weimer <f...@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
> * Andrew DeMarsh: > > >> > >> Quite a few people view such a requirement in a software license as > >> DFSG-noncompliant. I think it would be a bit odd if OSI adopted such > >> a requirement within its contribution process. > >> > > > > I'm not sure that it would be required in the license text itself > possibly > > only interacting with the mailing list review, I am confused as to which > > DFSG guideline this would run afoul, (Possibly 5?) could you elaborate? > > I think the most common interpretation is that outlawing anonymous > changes is an implicit restriction on field of endeavor (because you > cannot modify the software in a context in which you want to stay > anonymous for reasons of personal safety, say). > That's confusing the license itself with the process of approval. A license that tried to prevent anonymous use or improvement of the software would be clearly non-conformant, but requiring either a real-world identity or a stable and well-used online pseudo identity from license submitters would not affect later users of the license itself if approved. Regards, Simon
_______________________________________________ The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address. License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
