On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 8:29 AM Nathan Willis via License-discuss <license-discuss@lists.opensource.org> wrote:
> And those factors would need to interact predictably with a specification > document that is free to read, implement, and share ... but the specification > should not be forked or modified (since that would defeat the purpose: > interoperability). This is the key problem with your license in my opinion. It replicates a traditional assumption in the standards community that copyright should be used to prevent people from modifying specifications. I think this was rooted in a bygone era not around interoperability objectives but rather business models in which certain prominent standards organizations used the sale of copies of standards documents as a revenue stream (perhaps some of them still attempt to do this). Of course, prohibiting modification is in direct conflict with norms around free software/open source licensing and free/open/libre documentation. The two approaches can coexist but it is often awkward. For example, the Fedora project classifies standards documents as "content" conveniently to allow packages to bundle standards documents under licenses that would violate project legal norms around licensing of software or documentation. Fedora struggles to be as much of a _libre_ distribution as possible and I would say some of the biggest obstacles to this stem from licensing of artifacts of standards organizations that invariably get bundled in software packages. I have never seen a convincing justification for why standards licenses should prohibit modification; it seems more like a cargo cult thing. If the goal is to promote interoperability, I would think reasonable restrictions on naming of derivative works, whether rooted in trademark or otherwise, would be good enough. Personally, I would rather see specifications licensed under an open source license. Richard _______________________________________________ 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
