The justification for de-listing presently accepted licenses is that:
1. They are ambiguous or likely to perform in court in unexpected ways, should they ever be litigated. And thus they are harmful to their users. De-listing is a prompt to the organization that originally created the license to replace it with an accepted license or to submit a new version with greater legal competence in its construction. These would be the "crayon" licenses, mostly, those written without legal counsel.
2. They don't comply with the OSD and were accepted in error. 3. They are both redundant /and /rarely used.Those are the only justifications. You don't get to de-list something because you don't like its politics.
I think you need to have a committee review a proposal to de-list, with arguments from the submitter regarding the problems in the license, and with advice from an attorney on whether the suggested problems are really problems.
Thanks
Bruce
On 03/06/2013 08:23 PM, Luis Villa wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Richard Fontana <[email protected]> wrote:The Frameworx license is one of those OSI-approved licenses that I believe was approved "in haste". If OSI had such a procedure, I would recommend that the Frameworx license be reviewed for de-listing.Any recommendations on what such a process would look like, Richard? I'm not super-enthused about the idea, but don't want to rule out anything without at least some discussion. Luis _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
<<attachment: bruce.vcf>>
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
