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

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

Dear Riley Baird,

Am 2016-01-21 um 22:44 schrieb Riley Baird:

    In order to improve the situation and make this software available to
a broader public I have once more designed a completely new license from
scratch: the so called 'Convertible Free Software License'.

It's almost never a good idea to make your own license. And I know how
you feel, because I've played with the idea of doing the same thing.[1]

For one thing, there is the problem of license proliferation.

Yes that is certainly a problem; though there are some attempts to mitigate these issues:
* it can be used together with any other OSS compatible license.
* there should be no need for a separate library license like the LGPL for the GPL as far as the license was designed correctly.

The other, more important thing is that if you are not a lawyer, you
have most likely done it incorrectly. There are probably many loopholes
in what you have written, especially given the length of your license.

Well, once we should get the draft to be ready for approval I should possibly try to ask someone (f.i. from my University) who has studied law. I can not guarantee for it at the moment though.

Getting legal advice on drafting a license can be expensive, but in
comparison to actually enforcing the license, it is cheap. If you're
not willing to spend money on a lawyer now, you need to ask yourself
whether or not you're ever going to actually enforce the license. If
you don't plan on enforcing it, then it is worthless.

One of the purposes of this license is that I know that I can use patches / corrections / developments from other people. The second point about it is that not everyone should be allowed to re-license (as opposed to BSD). Ultimately I am not planning to sue anyone. Nonetheless I would assume that if there is a license people will not obviously violate it (Yes there may be unclear things about it where I do not win.).

Before you do get legal advice, however, there are some DFSG problems
with this license. If you're still interested in making this license,
let me know and I'll tell you the ones that I've found.

Yes I am still interested.
What DFSG problems have you found?

(two about the desert island test should have been clarified in my last mail for jonathon).

Good luck,

Riley Baird

[1] My ideal license would mandate the American rule on costs and ensure
that the right to modify, distribute, etc. must be preserved, but there
would be no obligation to provide source code.

no obligation to provide source? - but then the sources are not 'open'; you must be joking?!


Reply to: