Subject: Re: AW: For Approval - German Free Software License
From: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:49:15 -0500

Ian Lance Taylor writes:
 > As far as I can see, the minimal compromise which the OSI could accept
 > would be:
 > 
 > "The new version of the License becomes binding for you as soon as you
 > become aware of its publication and as soon as it has been approved by
 > the OSI."
 > 
 > (You will also want a clause to handle the case where the OSI no
 > longer exists.)

If that was the case, there would be no more license approvals, and
people would not be obligated to switch to the new license.  Your
language is sufficient.

 > The key point, I think, is this: the OSI can not delegate to any other
 > organization whether a license meets the OSD.

I think that the GFSL folks aren't asking us to do that.  They're
asking us to allow them to use the OSI-Certified mark on goods which
might not be OSI-Certified in the future.  If they changed the
license, they would have to remove all use and reference to the
OSI-Certified mark.  That would mean a total product recall if they
mentioned the OSI-Certified mark anywhere on or in the product.

Since I don't think that's possible, and since we need to control the
use of the OSI-Certified mark, that is yet another reason not to
approve the license.

-- 
--My blog is at angry-economist.russnelson.com  | Violence never solves
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | problems, it just changes
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 cell  | them into more subtle
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 212-202-2318 VOIP  | problems.