I don't think that's the point of the entry Luis is constructing. He's using the word "standardized" as a term of speech rather than as a technical term.
Mind you, OSI has described itself as a standards body for open source licenses for a long time, see http://opensource.org/about (I believe that text used to be on the home page). S. On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 8:31 PM, Lawrence Rosen <lro...@rosenlaw.com> wrote: > How about "OSI Approved" license? That's what you do. > > > Simon Phipps <webm...@opensource.org> wrote: > > Care to propose an improvement? > > > On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 7:37 PM, lro...@rosenlaw.com > <lro...@rosenlaw.com>wrote: > >> "Standard" is a loaded term. Licenses are not standards and OSI is not a >> standards organization. Larry >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Luis Villa >> Date:04/27/2014 6:11 PM (GMT-08:00) >> To: License Discuss >> Subject: [License-discuss] FAQ entry (and potential website page?) on >> "why standard licenses"? >> >> Hi, all- >> >> A few of us were talking and realized the FAQ/website have nothing to >> explain why *using standard licenses* is a good idea. This being a sort of >> basic point, I started remedying the problem :) >> >> Draft FAQ entry addressing the question is here: >> http://wiki.opensource.org/bin/Projects/Why+standardized+licensing%3F >> >> There is also an incomplete potential more-than-FAQ answer that could be >> put somewhere on opensource.org. The more I think about it, the more I >> think the FAQ may be sufficient, but I'd be curious what others here think >> and whether something longer is worthwhile. >> >> Feedback is probably better on-wiki but the list is fine too. :) >> Luis >> >
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
