Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 18th Aug 2007 20:13 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source The OSI License-Discuss mailing list has been ablaze for the past few days since Microsoft submitted its Permissive License to the OSI for official open source license approval. Jon Rosenberg, source program director for Microsoft, posted, "Microsoft believes that this license provides unique value to the open source community by delivering simplicity, brevity, and permissive terms combined with intellectual property protection."
Thread beginning with comment 264653
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: To be honest...
by segedunum on Mon 20th Aug 2007 21:26 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: To be honest..."
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

Anyway, it's not relevant to the OSI submission process, despite DiBona's wishes to the contrary.

I'm afraid it is. A track record with an open style organisation such as the OSI is pretty much a given. Microsoft has done nothing to help the OSI, has done everything to deride it's cause and that of the concept of open source software and the licenses they are submitting do nothing to help open source software, nor do they further it in any way. The OSI has also stated it wants to cut down on the variety of different licenses.

I'm afraid Microsoft cannot just submit a license to the OSI and expect it to be accepted. The licenses many vendors have come under quite a bit of scrutiny as well, and arguably, they shouldn't have been approved by the OSI.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: To be honest...
by MollyC on Tue 21st Aug 2007 06:30 in reply to "RE[6]: To be honest..."
MollyC Member since:
2006-07-04

Anyway, it's not relevant to the OSI submission process, despite DiBona's wishes to the contrary.

I'm afraid it is. [snipped trite Microsoft bashing]


If you bothered to read the OSI discussion list, you'll see that DiBona isn't getting much, if any, support. So while you believe this is relevant, I don't think OSI on the whole does.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: To be honest...
by segedunum on Tue 21st Aug 2007 15:07 in reply to "RE[7]: To be honest..."
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm afraid it is. [snipped trite Microsoft bashing]

Whatever sweetheart.

If you bothered to read the OSI discussion list, you'll see that DiBona isn't getting much, if any, support. So while you believe this is relevant, I don't think OSI on the whole does.

Di Bona has got quite a bit of support once he's explained his position, so please don't take that Microsoft tac with me and tell me what's going on as if it's some sort of fact.

Fact is, that view is very important to the OSI and the licenses it endorses, and having a track record is very important in a community and committee based organisation. If you don't have it then you don't get a free ride. I also explained the OSI's current licensing view of cutting down on the number of needless licenses, most variations on a theme, and that really does apply.

Reply Parent Score: 2