Subject: Re: License Committee Report
From: Carmen Leeming <cleeming@uvic.ca>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 17:05:50 -0800

Hi Russell.  We are still waiting on approval for the Adaptive Public 
License.  After the last set of approvals, it was determined that more 
discussion was needed on our license.  I prompted people for more 
feedback, and we made some minor changes based on the comments 
received.  Since that period we have been waiting for the next board 
approval meeting.  Hopefully you can recommend that our license pass 
approval this time.

Thanks,
Carmen Leeming

> Russell Nelson wrote:
>
> Carmen Leeming writes:
> > Title: Adaptive Public License
> > Submission: > 
> http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:6913:200305:bogcdnbbhnfbgpdeahob
> > License: http://www.mamook.net/APL.html
> > > This license was submitted in May 2003. I checked in June to make 
> sure > that the license had entered the submission process, and 
> received a > reply indicating that it was received and was currently 
> under review. I > wrote again in November and never heard back.
>
>Sorry, your license fell through the cracks.  I have no automated
>system for tracking license approvals.  On a quick reading, I don't
>see any problem with it.
>


Russell Nelson wrote:

>I'm the chair of the license approval committee.  This is my report
>for the current set of licenses under discussion.  If anybody
>disagrees with my assessment of the committee's conclusions, say so
>promptly.
>
>--
>
>Title: mindmason license (MML)
>Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:8573:chcedgdidbncghbgaaol
>License: in the submission.
>Comments:
>  There has been some discussion, but nothing conclusive.
>  The requirement to notify the Original Author is not acceptable
>  since it puts the onus on the licensee to effectively notify the
>  Original Author.  This process must be done in a way that spells out
>  exactly how that notification occurs, and if there is any failure in
>  the notification process, the default must be to allow distribution.
>Recommend: rejection.
>
>Title: Allegro giftware license
>Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:8647:200409:ncnfkeknbbmhcknnelja
>Withdrawn: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:8718:ncnfkeknbbmhcknnelja
>Recommend: no action needed.
>
>Title: Academic Citing License
>Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:8728:200409:mmpfkiadnfpihdobmdkc
>License: in the submission.
>Comments:  Stephen C. North, among others, agrees with me that the
>  requirement to cite the software is a restriction on use rather than
>  distribution.  Since we very much want to keep that camel's nose out
>  of the tent, we should reject this license, well-intentioned though
>  it is.
>Recommend: rejection.
>
>Title: Educational Community License
>Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:8241:200406:bhdlpklblgkoobnmifcc
>License: http://wheeler.kelley.indiana.edu/ecl1.htm 
>Comments: Ernie and Rod both agreed it was compliant.  I think that
>  it's just not that unique a license, however it's clear that they
>  have thought carefully about the terms although perhaps not so
>  carefully about license proliferation. 
>Recommend: approval.
>
>Title: TURKIX PUBLIC LICENSE
>Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:8862:200410:ldicfnokcepogiogbmch
>Withdrawn: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:8870:200410:ldicfnokcepogiogbmch
>
>Title: OZPLB Licence
>Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:8849:200410:jneejnfcgpacdjcfbokf
>License: http://nicta.com.au/ozplb_licence.cfm
>Comments: no comments.
>Recommend: table.
>
>Title: MirOS Licence Template & OpenBSD License Template
>Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:8907:200411:ifijhbodihcacgebbjkb
>License: 
>Comments: Sigh.  Both these licenses are obviously open source, they
>  are trivial changes from the BSD license, and yet the authors
>  insist on using them rather than the BSD license.
>Recommend: approval, reluctantly.
>
>  
>