Re: debian-legal review of licenses
Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader wrote:
* Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> [2004-02-13 04:09]:
Hm, that would involve somebody monitoring the OSI lists, because an
Are the OSI lists public (sorry, cannot check, I'm off-line at the
moment waiting for my plane to Malaga)? Is anyone from -legal
following them already?
OSI lista are public, and I read the license-discuss list.
There are a lot of "off-topic" flames, but very costructive
comments on how to improve licenses
unsolicited approach to the licensor *after* the OSI process has
finished cannot help but be interpreted as rude.
I'm not sure if this is true. Say someone approaches OSI with their
license, the OSI has their decision making process and announces that
the license is OSI compliant. -legal reads the license and find some
issues why the license is not DFSG-free. Someone then contact the
author of the license, basically saying "We noticed that you have just
been OSI certified, but we found that it does not adhere to the DFSG
because of this and that. The DFSG is about this and that, and this
is why it is different to the OSI guidelines and we why feel it is
important to comply with the DFSG." I don't think such a mail would
be perceived as rude. Some people might ignore it and not care, but I
cannot see people seeing it as rude.
OSI guidelines are very similar to ours (they based from our DFSG).
It would interessting to find the differences and see if we should
update our DFSG.
ciao
cate
Reply to: