Subject: Re: For Approval: NASA Open Source Agreement Version 1.1
From: jcowan@reutershealth.com
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:03:59 -0500

Lawrence E. Rosen scripsit:

> >          iii.  NASA policy requires an effort to accurately 
> > track usage of 
> > released software for documentation and benefits 
> > realized?purposes.  See 3.F.
> 
> Such provisions are not allowed in an open source license. Reporting
> requirements are viewed as unreasonable limitations on the rights of
> licensees to do anything they want internally with open source software
> (e.g., make copies, derivative works, etc.). On the other hand, because of
> "reciprocity" (see my further comment below) you'll be able to see
> improvements to NASA software that are distributed by others, and benefit
> from them. That will be measurable.

Note the wording "requires an effort to accurately track".  It is the
effort, not the tracking, that is mandatory, and indeed the draft NOSA
"requests" rather than "requires" users to register with NASA.

-- 
"They tried to pierce your heart                John Cowan
with a Morgul-knife that remains in the         http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
wound.  If they had succeeded, you would        http://www.reutershealth.com
become a wraith under the domination of the Dark Lord."         --Gandalf
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3