[License-discuss] [FWD: RE: [CAVO] Fwd: Re: [License-review] Submission of OSET Public License for Approval]

Thu, 03 Sep 2015 08:48:23 -0700

Just forwarding this discussion on OSL metrics here too.

David
 
From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2015 8:59 PM
To: CAVO <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [CAVO] Fwd: Re: [License-review] Submission of OSET Public License for Approval
 
I would also point out that an open source solution stack for a typical voting solution today includes a whole raft of licenses.
 
One approach I have seen by a commercial vendor, namely Garmin, in their software that compliments their POV action camera - is to give you a dialogue during install that allows you to view all the licenses from the component parts. I believe this is the only rational way to tackle this. In their case they have licenses from Microsoft, Apache, Mozilla, GPL, compression algorithms, and of course their own - in total over 20 are shown.
 
Notice that an open source voting solution could look something like this:
 
Operating system - Ubuntu - open source license from Canonical in the UK, with subsidiary licenses from sundry manufacturers for hardware drivers, such as Intel and more.
 
Database - MySQL - open source license from Oracle Corporation - modified Mozilla license.
 
Printer and scanner drivers from the SANE community - open source license.
 
Main voting software module - GPL3 license and then licenses for the software language(s) - e.g. Python or Ruby with Rails.  And if you are using OASIS EML voting data standards - there is that public use license too.
Then library open source licenses - such as the Java Xerces XML parser from IBM.
 
I struggle to see how an OSET license is the ring that binds them all here, or that a government entity could expect that.  Not even a Microsoft machine running Windows can give you that - it too comes with a raft of ancillary licenses from all the component parts.
 
I have had long dialogues with corporate lawyers trying to reconcile all this - and the bottom line is - you cannot. Pick the appropriate license that fits best the use case for your own deliverable software - and move forward.
 
As I mentioned - I like the Garmin approach here - show the appropriate applicable licenses - by component - and let that stand.  The user accepts that hybrid solution set and license package.
 
If there is a need here - it is to educate the elections authority community as to what is inside the box and how their purchase contract applies to the services they will receive. 
 
Imagine if you had to buy a car this same way, you'd have paperwork equivalent to buying a home, with boxes of paper to sign off on for all the parts from vendors around the world for each of the parts included.
 
David
 
 
 
 
 
 
_______________________________________________
License-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss

Reply via email to