Right, Iâm on same page. OSI where it is relevant, and develop a white list for things like open data, documents, etc.
Cheers,
Christopher Ferris IBM Fellow, CTO Open Technology On Sep 24, 2021, at 3:37 PM, Joshua R. Simmons <oasis@joshsimmons.com> wrote:
ï
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
I don't have any views on specific licenses, but I'm naturally inclined to say that it'd be prudent to limit to OSI-approved licenses where appropriate (ofc, licensing for data is an area where OSI doesn't help).
My rationale is that we want to ensure these projects are successful, part of success is ensuring the barriers to adoption are low, and restricting the licenses to a subset of OSI-approved will facilitate that
Because while compliance regimes vary (some companies don't mind the WTFPL), there's broad agreement under the banner of OSI-approved licenses, even if any given company might have a blanket ban on reciprocal-style OSI-approved licenses.
TZ: US/Pacific; UTC-07:00 Mar-Nov; UTC-08:00 Nov-Mar
ad astra per aspera ð
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021, at 08:40, Jamie Clark wrote:
Hello all. Looking forward to your feedback. Obviously we're happy to hear thoughts on Monday, but we're merely kicking off the consultation there. Public or private thoughts by email also welcome.
For people who dislike 4 page documents, here's the TL;DR version:
1. Should we add more FOSS licenses to our Open Projects? Which ones? CLDA? AGPL? Does the license's source matter? Does their status within OSI matter?
2. Within our menu of permitted licenses, we're pretty hands-off about telling projects what licenses to use. Projects could get caught in their own webs of multiple-license conflicts. How well do we think this "moderated chaos" approach to license selection works?
3. We believe we'd be unable to submit GPL'd work to some entities, likely including ISO and some government procurement processes, due to their own requirements. But how will CC-0 public domain licensing go over? You may remember we chatted about CC-0 when we added it 18 months ago.* It's being used in some of our work. As it matures, any further thoughts about applying CC-0 to technical content?
4. Do we need to simplify our OASIS CLAs? Or to differentiate more between individual contributors, vs entities who have their employees contribute, vs repo maintainers/ committers? Ours** currently look a lot like the 2017 Apache model.
cordially Jamie
![]()
| James Bryce Clark
General Counsel
OASIS Open
|
| |
Hi everyone,
Here's the agenda for our meeting on Monday. We have two main topics we'd like to hear your ideas and feedback on.
1) Consultation on Emerging IP issues and practices in Open Projects (Guest: Jamie Clark of OASIS)
2) Brief update on establishing the OASIS Open Strategy Working Group
Please let me know if there is any other topic you'd like to suggest for this meeting.
Very much looking forward to talking to you all on Monday,
Claudia
![]()
| Claudia Rauch
Open Projects Program Manager
OASIS Open
|
|
|
| |
|