> -----Original Message----- > From: Nicholas Matthew Neft Weinstock <nwein...@qti.qualcomm.com> > Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2022 11:01 AM > To: ch...@dibona.com; license-discuss@lists.opensource.org; > mc...@lexpan.law > Subject: RE: [License-discuss] Retroactively disapproving licenses > > One of the parts of my job is reviewing commercial contracts. Some of those > contracts include references to Open Source. For example, they might say > something like "Supplier will provide a list of all 3rd party software > included > in the product that is under an Open Source License." Or "Contractor may > only use 3rd party code subject to an Open Source License, not Commercial > or Freeware licenses." In the majority of these contracts, the definition of > an > "Open Source License" references the list of OSI-Approved Licenses. I think > this is a good thing for OSI, as it enhances the organization's public image > and influence.
I sort of feel like if you're using this sort of clause, and limiting it to only OSI-approved licenses, you're leaving a huge gap (compare the list of SPDX licenses to the OSI-approved licenses, for example). Nevertheless, I can't see a justification for keeping a license on the list if it in fact it does not meet the OSD. And, as I think some have argued on the approval list before, it opens you up for the argument that "you approved this OSD-non-compliant license in the past, so you should approve *my* OSD-non-compliant license now." > My suggestion is to think of the official list as a historical statement. > This is a > list of licenses that OSI has ever approved. Then within that list, maybe > there > could be a designation for licenses that the OSI board no longer supports. > This has been at least one suggestion for how to deal with licenses that are non-compliant. My guess is that you'd do something like what has been done for deprecated licenses -- say past uses are grandfathered, but that future uses are not recommended, and that projects that have used licenses deemed non-compliant are strongly encouraged to change to a different, compliant, license. _______________________________________________ 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
