Re: [License-discuss] Certifying MIT-0

FWIW I thought the zLib license was a good alternative for this use-case (e.g. sample code that you expect people to use, modify and you don't want to be attributed). But MIT-0 has the Warranty disclaimer. Seems better for that reason. Gil Yehuda: I help with external technology engagement >From

Re: [License-discuss] How can we as a community help empower authors outside license agreements?

f your head! Your brains are laying on the ground in little bloody pieces! Now I ask ya. Would you give a f@#$ what kind of pants the son of a bitch who shot you was wearing? I assume that victims of human rights abuse feel similarly about the license text in our source code. Gil Yehuda: I hel

Re: [License-discuss] How can we as a community help empower authors outside license agreements?

Tobie One day my grandchild will ask me "what did you do to fight genocide in your day?" I hope to be able to give a better answer than "I helped make sure to put an anti-genocide clause in my source code licenses." She'll ask "that's all you did?" and I'll say "no, dear, I made sure that the lice

Re: [License-discuss] How can we as a community help empower authors outside license agreements?

Tobie > I believe that to many open source practitioners, the meaning of open source is much broader than the OSD. It's even more complicated. The term _open source_ is also used by the intelligence industry too, and means something very different. Looking for open source jobs in the greater Wash

Re: [License-discuss] How can we as a community help empower authors outside license agreements?

at 11:52 AM Kevin P. Fleming wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 11:44 AM Gil Yehuda via License-discuss > wrote: > > > tl;dr: What about the classification "Source-available" is insufficient > for the Ethical Source movement such that changing the OSD is seen as a > ben

Re: [License-discuss] How can we as a community help empower authors outside license agreements?

One of the challenges the Ethical Source Movement will continue to face is related to 'ethical' their *nom de net*. But it appears to be a distraction for the issues being raised to this list. I urge people who care about ethics to pursue ethical pursuits. The questions posed here, however, have to

Re: [License-discuss] How can we as a community help empower authors outside license agreements?

Tobie, I don't understand the point that you are trying to make in your recent posts (about how the OSI election works and how the "winner takes" model is not representative of voter sentiment). Let me explain where my confusion about your message is centered: Coraline has said many times that she

Re: [License-discuss] How can we as a community help empower authors outside license agreements?

I would caution overanalyzing the voter data given the method in which voting take place. A vote for a candidate may be given for many reasons. Candidates addressed more than one issue in their wiki. Moreover, the system is set up so that voters neglect to vote for people they don't want to see se

Re: [License-discuss] Thoughts on the subject of ethical licenses

external technology engagement On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 7:20 PM Josh Berkus wrote: > On 3/12/20 8:12 AM, Gil Yehuda via License-discuss wrote: > > 1. I created this code. > > 2. I seek to display it for others to see. Perhaps comment, improve, or > > at least recognize me for

Re: [License-discuss] Thoughts on the subject of ethical licenses

If you strip away dog whistling and provocative terms that often bring out less productive discussions, there is something similar here to other "source-available but restricted" ideas. The generic shape of the argument in simplified form: 1. I created this code. 2. I seek to display it for others

Re: [License-discuss] Thoughts on the subject of ethical licenses

ords. Sorry to distract from the conversation. Gil Yehuda: I help with external technology engagement On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 6:05 PM Josh Berkus wrote: > On 3/11/20 2:33 PM, Gil Yehuda via License-discuss wrote: > > This topic is very important and we're all passionate about

Re: [License-discuss] Thoughts on the subject of ethical licenses

Josh thank you. This topic is very important and we're all passionate about it. Written text in email groups is notoriously bad for conveying nuance. I was hoping to come across more balanced than perhaps I did. My essential message is that as a discussion list we're most effective toward our goals

Re: [License-discuss] Thoughts on the subject of ethical licenses

A few weeks ago I said that if I really wanted to know about "ethical source licensing" I would join the ethical source licensing discussion group. I was thinking at the time that I'm actually interested in open source licensing -- which is why I'm in *this* group. But I thought -- maybe I *should*

Re: [License-discuss] Thoughts on the subject of ethical licenses

Coraline I'll share my opinion, offered with respect and after considerable reading and thinking about this. In order for the ethical source movement (ESM) to succeed and be understood, I recommend taking much more control over messaging. In your email below you said you resent the us-vs-them fra

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

y the perceive that reality. I'm not suggesting this is ideal, but I think control and trust are factors here. Gil Yehuda: I help with external technology engagement >From the Open Source Program Office <https://developer.yahoo.com/opensource/docs/> at Yahoo --> Oath - -&g

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

in the structure, sequencing, or > organization of the implementation? Or, conversely, is it possible that > the implementation still has your code, but it has been so spliced and > reformatted and polished that the subsequent contributions have effectively > replaced all of your creativ

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

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. Assume I need an algorithm, say the quadratic formula. Option A is promising and is licen

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical open source licensing - Dual Licensing for Justice

technology engagement >From the Open Source Program Office <https://developer.yahoo.com/opensource/docs/> at Yahoo --> Oath - -> Verizon Media On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:09 PM Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Gil Yehuda via License-discuss : > > Personally I'm confused about the

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical open source licensing - Dual Licensing for Justice

We operate in the realm of words, and words matter, words help clarify. Analogy: Food labels can indicate a product to be Organic, Free Trade, Gluten-free, Kosher, Poisonous, etc. Each of these labels indicate something different. No one insists that in order to be considered Free Trade that a pro

Re: [License-discuss] "Ethical open source" and the Persona Non Grata clause.

OSI has two public email lists related to licensing. One is for review, one is for discussion. This one is for discussion. I happen to agree with those here who think conflating "ethics" (or various proxies thereof) into the open source licenses does great disservice -- in irony to the benevolent

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

If I'm following this correctly, I think the proposal is to have an OSD compliant license that has attached to it some sort of credo and wall of shame. The credo defines the category of undesirables and the wall of shame preserves the record of those names upon distribution. Although clearly not t

Re: [License-discuss] MIT-Clone: Copyright notice

I bet when copyright was first created, the working assumption is that a work is a relatively static thing. Software is not. And this brings up the Ship of Theseus problem (Take a ship, replace all the boards. at what point is it no longer the same sh

Re: [License-discuss] Open Source Software Question.

As James indicates -- the expression "released under dual licences" implies one project with a choice between two licenses. This seems to be two things (in a project). Thing1 is open source and Think2 is not. As Kevin said, Think2 is not open source. Presumably nothing stops you from using Think1 u

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical + Support license addition for Apache

I believe this group is about discussing licenses, and not giving legal advice about what you can or should do. In that context: "Can I release the software under a dual license: AGPL and my modified Apache?" yes, you can do whatever you please with your code. However the world will recognize that

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical + Support license addition for Apache

To Ofer's new suggestion making registration a condition: no. That does not work, either by the letter or, or the spirit of, open source. I'd *love* to know who uses our code. If we run a meetup for an open source project we run, we ask people on our message boards to speak (and they tell us they

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical + Support license addition for Apache

Oath - -> Verizon Media On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 10:46 AM Ofer wrote: > > > On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 17:36, Gil Yehuda via License-discuss < > license-discuss@lists.opensource.org> wrote: > >> >I'd love to know what you think of the whole thing. >> >

Re: [License-discuss] Ethical + Support license addition for Apache

>I'd love to know what you think of the whole thing. tl;dr: It's difficult to control other people's actions. Instead, seek acceptable outcome for yourself, and inspire goodness in others. You explain "I'd like to open source my company's code, but, I'm worried my code will be misused." which is

Re: [License-discuss] Intimacy in open source (SSPL and AGPL)

Bruce, My read is that there are two motivations to the copyleft license. 1. The purist motivation is based on the ideal that there should be no proprietary code (or at least that users of someone else's code should have access to that code as a sort of "right to repair" as expressed by the four fr

Re: [License-discuss] Intimacy in open source (SSPL and AGPL)

(Forgive the resend, my email address changed). A license with parameters such that end users are advised to first engage a legal expert to help craft a usage architecture, seems to be lacking completion. Licenses should speak for themselves. I'm glad there is a community of informed lawyers I can

Re: [License-discuss] OPEN Government Data Act signed into law in US

Sean, In trying to parse the legal definition in the sections you mentioned I poked around to see if there is a data equivalent to the OSD ( https://opensource.org/osd-annotated) or FSF's four freedoms to determine if the legal text matches it. I came across a few things that seemed to fit the bil

Re: [License-discuss] Intimacy in open source

e for this very reason. *Gil Yehuda: *I run the open source program office at Yahoo --> Oath --> Verizon Media. On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 4:42 PM Luis Villa wrote: > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 12:43 PM John Cowan wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:36 AM Gil Yehuda v

[License-discuss] Intimacy in open source

First time posting to this group. I hope the subject line got you to read further. I'm not asking for legal advise, but posing a question about a phrase used in AGPL/GPL v3.0 and hoping to get insight on how to interpret it properly. The phrase is "intimate data communication" as found here: For e