Bruce,
The OSI treats all license submitters with dignity and respect, no
matter how frivolous their licenses might be. That's what we did with
the anonymous person who submitted the Vaccine License, one who took
great pains to make it look like a legitimately held belief, including
creating a website. You then participated in the discussion of the
license in the same spirit, treating it as a legitimate request.
Where is your email where you withdrew the license because the OSI
didn't get the "prank"? The Vaccine License went to a Board vote on
January 10, 2020:
The Vaccine License
* *Motion* (Pam): The Board of the Open Source Initiative withholds
approval of the Vaccine License as an Open Source Initiative
Approved Open Source license.
*Second* (Deb):
*Discussion*: Review of the License Review committee's decision
making and decision.
*Vote*: 9 Yes, 0 No, 0 Abstain
https://wiki.opensource.org/bin/Main/OSI%20Board%20of%20Directors/Board%20minutes/2020/2020-01-10
http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-January/004645.html
You may also recall that once we learned it was you, your "prank"
resulted in your temporary ban from the license-review list as a
violation of the Code of Conduct. I'm glad you now realize that the joke
backfired on you.
Pam
On 2/5/2024 10:46 AM, Bruce Perens via License-discuss wrote:
Well that joke backfired on me, didn't it? I made a charicture of
"ethical" licenses, and ended up withdrawing it because I was afraid
they'd actually approve it! It was meant to be like a "moot bill". A
lot of people did not then, and still do not get the concept. Silly me
for expecting them to. I can't truly say I regret pranking them, though.
Regarding anonymity, there is little proof of the identity of many
people on this list. Debian always required that someone meet you and
cross-sign your key before you could check in a package. You can
always take charge of that if you want an effective filter.
Thanks
Bruce
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024, 18:00 McCoy Smith <mc...@lexpan.law> wrote:
I agree.
Unfortunately, these sort of “whimsical,” unserious,
impossible-to-satisfy-the-OSI-definition submissions are a fairly
regular phenomenon these days on the OSI e-mail lists. I think the
submitters who do this were emboldened by whoever it was that
submitted the Vaccine License
<https://blog.opensource.org/licensereview102019/> back in 2019.
Shame on that person for starting the trend.
I think OSI was going to use the Vaccine License submission and
subsequent history as an example of what people should not be
doing (and probably should also have a policy that potentially
frowns upon anonymized submissions) and put something about that
in the pages on license discussion/review. Might want to revisit that.
*From:*Bruce Perens <br...@perens.com>
*Sent:* Monday, February 5, 2024 8:03 AM
*To:* mc...@lexpan.law
*Cc:* license-discuss@lists.opensource.org
*Subject:* Re: [License-discuss] License Review Request - Anu
Initiative
It is a crayon license, and the author points out its whimsical
nature while wishfully saying the terms bind anyway. There is no
point in passing it on for disapproval or doing anything else to
take it seriously. Just politely tell the author there isn't a chance.
IMO if you want to help the open source community, don't draft a
new license. I actually do not see value in even continuing the
approval process at this late date. It's just not the case that
any new submission contributes useful art.
Thanks
Bruce
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024, 15:52 McCoy Smith <mc...@lexpan.law> wrote:
And asked for review. Which he got.
Do you disagree that this license can’t get OSI approval?
*From:*Bruce Perens <br...@perens.com>
*Sent:* Monday, February 5, 2024 7:47 AM
*To:* mc...@lexpan.law; license-discuss@lists.opensource.org
*Subject:* Re: [License-discuss] License Review Request - Anu
Initiative
Note that he sent his review request to license-discuss.
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024, 15:45 McCoy Smith <mc...@lexpan.law> wrote:
Daniel:
In order to have a license reviewed, you need to provide
the assurances and information about the license
(https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process/)
including that it doesn’t violate any of the OSD. You have
not done any of that.
Since Section 4 of this license does violate OSD 6, it’s
not approvable. So I’d suggest that this license be
forwarded to the Board for denial.
*From:*License-discuss
<license-discuss-boun...@lists.opensource.org> *On Behalf
Of *Daniel Mihai
*Sent:* Saturday, February 3, 2024 10:10 AM
*To:* license-discuss@lists.opensource.org
*Subject:* [License-discuss] License Review Request - Anu
Initiative
Hi friends,
I hope this message finds you well and embracing the
natural world with enthusiasm and care.
I'm reaching out from the Anu Initiative, a nonprofit
organization rooted in Dublin, Ireland, with a mission
deeply intertwined with the love and restoration of our
planet. We are a collective of nature enthusiasts
leveraging innovative technologies to mend the
environmental scars left by human activities and certain
technological impacts.
At Anu Initiative, we are not just another entity in the
environmental sphere. We diverge from the conventional
path of carbon credits, focusing instead on tangible
ecological contributions. Our open-source platform
epitomizes transparency, allowing anyone to witness the
journey of every contribution made towards a greener tomorrow.
As we continue to weave technology with nature's
restoration, we are reviewing our Open License Agreement
to ensure it aligns with our core values of Transparency,
Passion, Integrity, Commitment, and Community. Your
expertise and insights would be invaluable in this process.
Could you please review our agreement?
https://forum.anuinitiative.org/t/anu-initiative-open-license-agreement-ai-ola/80
Thank you for considering our request. Together, we can
turn the tide towards a sustainable future.
Warm regards,
*Daniel Mihai*
Founder and CTO
*Mobile:*+353 (0) 87 450 8112
*E-mail:* dan...@anuinitiative.org
<mailto:dan...@anuinitiative.org>
*Web-site:*https://anuinitiative.org
<https://anuinitiative.org>
*
**Let’s take the initiative!*
_______________________________________________
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
<http://opensource.org> email address.
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@lists.opensource.org
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
