Subject: Three new proposed OSD terms
From: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:09:35 -0500

We have always pushed people in this direction, but by adding these
terms to the OSD, we will be proactively refusing licenses which don't
meet these requirements.

11. *The license must not be duplicative.*  That is, it is up to the 
    submitter to demonstrate that the license solves a problem not 
    sufficiently addressed by an existing certified license.  Certification 
    may be denied to any submitted license, even a technically OSD-
    conformant license, if OSI deems it duplicative.

12. *The license must be clearly written, simple, and understandable.* 
    Open-source licenses are written to serve people who are not
    attorneys, and they need to be comprehensible by people who are
    not attorneys.  OSI may deny certification to licenses which,
    though technically correct and OSD-compliant, are so obscure 
    and complicated that an intelligent layperson cannot be assured 
    of knowing his or her rights and liabilities after reading it.
    The burden of engineering this clarity falls on the submitter.

13. *The license must be reusable*.  If the license contains proper
    names of individuals, associations, or projects, these must be
    incorporated by reference from an attachment that declares the
    names of the issuer and any other cited parties, and which can be
    modified without changing the terms of the license.  As the sole
    exception, the license may name its owner and steward.

-- 
--My blog is at     blog.russnelson.com         | The laws of physics cannot
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | be legislated.  Neither can
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 cell  | the laws of countries.
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 212-202-2318 VOIP  |