[License-discuss] Backfilling Mailman archive gaps (was: Columbia S&T Law Review analysis of the OSI license-discuss mailing list)

Quoting McCoy Smith (mc...@lexpan.law): > License-approval only goes back to December, 2007; license-discuss > goes back to 1999, but as far as I can tell doesn’t include complete > discussion about approvals of licenses from 1999-2007 (those > discussions are on now-dead links to Russ Nelson’s pr

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical open source licensing - Persona non Grata Preamble

Quoting Grahame Grieve (grah...@healthintersections.com.au): [OSD #6: No Discrimination against Fields of Endeavor.] > This precludes discrimination against illegal activities, either in the > source or user jurisdiction, right? Has this ever been tested in court? > (E.g. an open source library

Re: [License-discuss] Columbia S&T Law Review analysis of the OSI license-discuss mailing list

Van Lindberg did an article arguing the opposite of the conclusions in this article: http://www.stlr.org/download/volumes/volume20/lindberg.pdf What I found curious about the Kappos/Harrington article was this statement and footnote: To remind ourselves of the conversations surrounding OSD

Re: [License-discuss] Columbia S&T Law Review analysis of the OSI license-discuss mailing list

On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 1:55 PM Christopher Sean Morrison via License-discuss wrote: > > I just came across interesting commentary by D. Kappos and M. Harrington > entitled “The Truth About OSS-FRAND: By All Indications, Compatible Models in > Standards Settings” in Columbia’s STLR, Spring 2019:

Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: Resources to discourage governments from bespoke licenses?

On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 6:03 PM McCoy Smith wrote: > > Looks like you're referring to Bryan Guerts (a NASA lawyer), who submitted > NOSA 2.0 (not 3.0) on June 13, 2013: > https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2013-June/001944.html > As far as I can tell, ther

Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: Resources to discourage governments from bespoke licenses?

On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 5:25 PM McCoy Smith wrote: > > >>-Original Message- > >>From: Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY CCDC ARL (USA) > >>Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 12:39 PM > >>To: mc...@lexpan.law; license-discuss@lists.opensource.org > >>Subject: RE: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re:

[License-discuss] Columbia S&T Law Review analysis of the OSI license-discuss mailing list

I just came across interesting commentary by D. Kappos and M. Harrington entitled “The Truth About OSS-FRAND: By All Indications, Compatible Models in Standards Settings” in Columbia’s STLR, Spring 2019: http://www.stlr.org/download/volumes/volume20/kappos.pdf

Re: [License-discuss] exploring the attachment between the author and the code

On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 11:31 AM Gil Yehuda via License-discuss < license-discuss@lists.opensource.org> wrote: > I'm exploring the psychological relationship between the author of a work, > and the work. i.e. parsing the phrase "my open source code" and would like > your thoughts. > What you appe

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical open source licensing - Persona non Grata Preamble

Grahame Grieve dixit: >specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program >from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research. >This precludes discrimination against illegal activities, either in the >source or user jurisdiction, right? Has this ever been

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical open source licensing - Persona non Grata Preamble

This discussion is important to me, and for some open source communities in health. Many contributors to open source health care communities are strongly driven by healthcare ethics, not open source ethics, and that gives rather different feelings about this. So I’m finding the discussion useful, a

[License-discuss] Still looking for nice

All, I'm still seeing a lot of emails that I think are too intemperate in tone. I suspect the reason is that we are on some very hot button topics for people. I'm asking everyone to put some more effort into editing their emails before sending. Perhaps edit it as if you're writing to the pers