Re: [PROPOSAL] Open Source certification

From: bruce(at)perens(dot)com
To: chip(at)perlsupport(dot)com, knghtbrd(at)debian(dot)org
Cc: bruce(at)perens(dot)com, debian-legal(at)lists(dot)debian(dot)org, spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Open Source certification
Date: 1999-04-02 19:59:25
Message-ID: 19990402195925.20579.qmail@perens.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: spi-general

Sorry for joining the thread so late - my DSL was down for three days.

From: Joseph Carter <knghtbrd(at)debian(dot)org>
> I formally propose that SPI step in and take control of its intellectual
> property.

I concur.

> So far I can name two such instances in which non-free licenses are being
> called Open Source. The first is Apple's license

Right.

> The other real recent example may or may not have been directly endorsed
> by OSI---I don't know for certain. The bitkeeper license is NOT Open
> Source

I spoke with Larry McVoy on the phone yesterday, it's very clear that he
is _not_ promoting the license as Open Source, and OSI is not accepting it
as such.

Thanks

Bruce

Responses

Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lynn Winebarger 1999-04-02 20:46:25 Re: [PROPOSAL] Open Source certification
Previous Message Nils Lohner 1999-04-01 18:30:44 Re: Bylwas Revision: COMMITTEES