We're having a conference on Open Source business methods:
https://ti.to/open-core-summit/open-core-summit/en
Palace of Fine Arts, San Francisco, September 19-20. Ticket prices are
about to go up, so this would be a good time to book.
--
Bruce Perens - Partner, OSS.Capital.
On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 1:51 PM Luis Villa wrote:
> There is of course still an area of overlap between administrators and
> users, so you're of course correct to say "system administrators are not
> always SaaS providers". But the union of "user" and "administrator" is
> shrinking over time; the
[Drafted weeks ago, but never sent; I think under the circumstances still
worth sending]
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 6:03 AM Pamela Chestek <
pamela.ches...@opensource.org> wrote:
> License Review Committee Recommendation:
>
My great thanks to Pam, the committee, and the full board for this
excellen
[I'll grant, for purposes of discussion of OSI's standards generally,
Bruce's use of 'encumber', but I think I agree with Van that with respect
to CAL specifically 'encumber' is incorrect.]
On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 12:29 PM Bruce Perens via License-discuss <
license-discuss@lists.opensource.org> wro
VanL dixit:
>And just so the actual scope is not further misconstrued, you only have to
>give the owner of the data an option to get a copy if the owner of the data
>has also received the software, or a portion thereof, or been a recipient
>of the services provided by the software from you.
This
VanL dixit:
>And more broadly, are "users" of SaaS programs not "users"? If I am not
There’s a distinction between Free Software (where the user is the
person running it) and Free Services (in which people interacting
with the software get additional consideration).
I think it’s important to not
On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 2:51 PM VanL wrote:
> All it says is that if a third party owns data that is processed by
> CAL-licensed software, you have to give that third party the ability to get
> a copy back.
>
And just so the actual scope is not further misconstrued, you only have to
give the own
Two points. First, and most importantly:
Bruce Perens wrote:
> I don't believe that FSF has ever made any statement in favor of
> encumbering the data processed by their programs. I don't believe they
> will. And I don't believe that encumbering user data is in any way a step
> *forward
> *for t
Software system administrators are not always SaaS providers. And users are
often administrators of their own software, that is a fundamental point of
Free Software, that you _can_ do that. I don't believe that FSF has ever
made any statement in favor of encumbering the data processed by their
prog
On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 6:40 AM Pamela Chestek
wrote:
>
> On 6/28/19 11:40 PM, Bruce Perens via License-discuss wrote:
>
>
>> 3.*A license that requires data portability*.
>> Section 2.3(b) obliges the user of a software to “provide to any third
>> party with which you have an enforceable leg
10 matches
Mail list logo
