[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Is OSL 2.0 compliant with DFSG?

Hi all,

I'm the maintainer  of the  brutefir  package and I received  the mail
below from Anders Torger, author of BruteFIR.

Please could you answer to his question?

Thanks,

Free Ekanayaka

PS: as me  and Anders are not subscribed  to debian-legal, please just
keep us in Cc: when replying
--- Begin Message --- 
On Friday 09 April 2004 16.22, you wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 20:32:09 +0200, Anders Torger
> >>>>> <torger@ludd.luth.se> said:
>
>     Anders> I noted that you have packaged BruteFIR for Debian. I'm
>     Anders> about to release version 1.0, and I am planning to change
>     Anders> the license to OSL 2.0, since I think it is better
>     Anders> written  than the GPL, easier to understand by laymen, better
>     Anders> suited to international law. I cannot see that it would
>     Anders> cause any trouble with the Debian Policy, but if you think
>     Anders> this license change will lead to problems, let me 
>     Anders> know. I'm not religious about it, I just like OSL better 
>     Anders> than the GPL, although they achieve the same things.
>
> Andres,
>
> first of all thanks for your work on BruteFIR ;-)
>
> I must say that I'm not  an expert of  licensing issues, so I'm not
> in the position to state  whether OSL  2.0 is  compliant with the 
> Debian Free-software Guide Lines. I've found this thread on
> debian-legal:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/debian-legal-200401/msg00005.html
>
> so it seems that OSL 2.0 is still matter of debate inside Debian.
>
> Shall I turn your question to the debian-devel mailing list?

Yes that would be interesting. Actually, I thought the patent clause 
could be a problem, but it is also one of the things that I really like 
about the license. Software patents are a real pain... I would like to 
see a license that would terminate all licenses if any action is taken 
against any software under the same license. I don't know if it is 
possible to design such a license though under international law, but 
if possible such a license would put a stronger defense against 
patent-based harassment (which I have been a target of personally for 
BruteFIR), and you would not need to give away copyright to FSF or 
another organisation for that.

Meanwhile, OSL 2.0 is along what I want to see, and I hope Debian 
accepts it. If they do not, I think I'll throw myself into the 
discussion...

/Anders

--- End Message ---






Reply to: