Subject: Re: Questions to OSI Board quorum
From: Rishab Aiyer Ghosh <>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:39:07 +0000

On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 01:21:01PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> current maintainer "I wish to opt-out."  If they don't do that, then
> the current maintainer has an obligation to the original contributor.

i actually think we should be careful about taking such a hard line on "discrimination".
for instance, CDDL has such an opt-out from licensing automatically under any future
versions of the CDDL. the default CDDL therefore discriminates against  everyone who
does not have the right to create a future version of the CDDL, under which all contribution
is licensed by default. however, it does allow contributors to opt-out of this by insisting
on v1.0 only.

(this is why i keep saying the GPL handles the version issue better, since if you refer
to a specific licence - "GPL v2.0" the default is that only that will apply.)

so i would say that an opt-out to the grant-back clause would make the OVPL acceptable.
however, that might be equivalent in effect to dual-licensing it under the current OVPL
and another licence, such as the GPL. i would then question why the OVPL would be necessary,
if its key attribute (grant-back) can be opted out of.