The ARL (and the USG in general) can still have both patent rights and trademark rights. Violate either, and the USG could bring suit on its own behalf. Moreover, while USG-generated works don't have copyright, that doesn't mean there is no copyright; contractors and others may choose to assign their copyright to the USG, in which case the ARL OSL will provide a license for that material as well. Finally, once a project starts accepting contributions, contributors may have copyright. They are licensing their material under the ARL OSL. Even if the USG doesn't have standing to bring a suit, those other contributors may wish to.
Taken together, it isn't just the USG by itself, its everything bundled together. Thanks, Cem Karan > -----Original Message----- > From: License-discuss [mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org] On > Behalf Of Kevin Fleming > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 9:07 AM > To: license-discuss@opensource.org > Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: US Army Research > Laboratory Open Source License proposal > > All active links contained in this email were disabled. Please verify the > identity of the sender, and confirm the authenticity of all links > contained within the message prior to copying and pasting the address to a > Web browser. > > > ________________________________ > > > > Maybe I'm just being naive here, but if the USG does not hold copyright on > this code (in the US), what ownership rights does it have? As > far as I know there are no other relevant intellectual property rights > involved here, since it's clearly not a trade secret, and patents are not > involved. There could be trademarks involved as has been mentioned in other > parts of the thread, but otherwise it's difficult to understand > what the USG would be licensing to anyone, since the USG has no ownership. > What would be the basis for the USG bringing suit against > someone for violating the license, if that were to occur? > > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US) > <cem.f.karan....@mail.mil < Caution- > mailto:cem.f.karan....@mail.mil > > wrote: > > > Marten, I don't have any case law regarding this, but the ARL Legal > team does hold that the US can assert copyright outside of the > US. > > As for the part about being void, I spend quite a bit of time talking > things over with the lawyers in the ARL Legal office. Here is > what they said: > > 1) A license is a contract. The USG can enter into and enforce > contracts. Thus, the USG can enforce a license by going to court, etc. > It can also defend itself in court based on a license (e.g., to defend > against claims of warranty, etc.). > > 2) Copyright is an entirely separate issue. Copyright can be used as > another mechanism to enforce the terms of a contract, but > copyright is not a contract. > > 3) The USG does not permit itself to have copyright within the US on > USG generated works. Thus, a contract (or license) whose > provisions are only enforceable by copyright assertions falls apart for the > USG. > > Taken together, if the USG used something like the Apache 2.0 license > on work that it generated that didn't have copyright, then > the license would be null and void. However, if the license was a contract, > and relied on more than just copyright protections, then the > license would still be valid and enforceable. Unless someone up our chain of > command states that it's OK to use one of the standard > licenses, we need something that works for us. This is not just to protect > the USG from liability claims, or patent infringement claims; it's > also to protect anyone that uses USG-furnished code. I don't have any case > law showing this has happened with USG-furnished code, but I > know similar things have happened in the private sector, e.g. Rambus > (Caution-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambus#Lawsuits < Caution- > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambus#Lawsuits > ). > > Thanks, > Cem Karan > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: License-discuss > [Caution-mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:license-discuss- > boun...@opensource.org > ] On Behalf Of Maarten Zeinstra > > Sent: Monday, August 01, 2016 4:21 AM > > To: license-discuss@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org > > > Cc: lro...@rosenlaw.com < Caution-mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com > > > Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: US Army Research > Laboratory Open Source License proposal > > > > All active links contained in this email were disabled. Please verify > the identity of the sender, and confirm the authenticity of all > links > > contained within the message prior to copying and pasting the address > to a Web browser. > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > Hi Cem, > > > > I believe this was already answered John Cowan, I was proven wrong. > US does assert copyright for government works in other > > jurisdictions. Wikipedia provides these sources: > > > > “The prohibition on copyright protection for United States Government > works is not intended to have any effect on protection > of these > > works abroad. Works of the governments of most other countries are > copyrighted. There are no valid policy reasons for denying > such > > protection to United States Government works in foreign countries, or > for precluding the Government from making licenses for > the use of > > its works abroad.” - House Report No. 94-1476 > > > > and > > > > “3.1.7 Does the Government have copyright protection in U.S. > Government works in other countries? > > Yes, the copyright exclusion for works of the U.S. Government is not > intended to have any impact on protection of these works > abroad (S. > > REP. NO. 473, 94th Cong., 2d Sess. 56 (1976)). Therefore, the U.S. > Government may obtain protection in other countries > depending on the > > treatment of government works by the national copyright law of the > particular country. Copyright is sometimes asserted by U.S. > > Government agencies outside the United States.” > Caution-Caution-http://www.cendi.gov/publications/04-8copyright.html#317 > < Caution-http://www.cendi.gov/publications/04-8copyright.html#317 > < > Caution- > > Caution-http://www.cendi.gov/publications/04-8copyright.html#317 < > Caution-http://www.cendi.gov/publications/04- > 8copyright.html#317 > > > > > > However I am not sure how this would work with the Berne Convention, > especially article 7(8) which states: ‘[..] the term shall > be > > governed by the legislation of the country where protection is > claimed; however, unless the legislation of that country otherwise > provides, > > the term shall not exceed the term fixed in the country of origin of > the work.’ If the U.S. term of protection is 0 years, than other > countries > > would also apply 0 years. > > > > @John, @Cem: do you have some case law about this? I would like to > verify this with my academic network in the U.S. If not, > any license > > you want to apply on this material is immediately void (which is only > a theoretical problem imo). > > > > Regards, > > > > Maarten > > > > -- > > Kennisland | Caution-Caution-www.kl.nl < > Caution-http://Caution-Caution-www.kl.nl > < > Caution-Caution-http://www.kl.nl < > Caution-http://www.kl.nl > > | t +31205756720 | m +31643053919 | @mzeinstra > > > > > > On 29 Jul 2016, at 19:37, Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL > (US) <cem.f.karan....@mail.mil < Caution- > mailto:cem.f.karan....@mail.mil > < Caution- > > Caution-mailto:cem.f.karan....@mail.mil < > Caution-mailto:cem.f.karan....@mail.mil > > > wrote: > > > > I'm sorry for getting back late to this, the lawyer I'm working > with was called away for a bit and couldn't reply. > > > > I asked specifically about this case; in our lawyer's opinion, > the US Government does have copyright in foreign (to the US) > > countries. He says that there is case law where the US has asserted > this, but he is checking to see if he can find case law > regarding this to > > definitively answer the question. > > > > Thanks, > > Cem Karan > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: License-discuss > [Caution-Caution-mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:license- > discuss-boun...@opensource.org > < Caution-Caution-mailto:license-discuss- < > Caution-mailto:license-discuss- > > > boun...@opensource.org < Caution-mailto:boun...@opensource.org > > ] > On Behalf Of Maarten Zeinstra > > Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2016 7:49 AM > > To: license-discuss@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org > < Caution-Caution- > mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org > > > > Cc: lro...@rosenlaw.com < > Caution-mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com > < > Caution-Caution-mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com < > Caution-mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com > > > > Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [License-discuss] US Army > Research Laboratory Open Source License proposal > > > > All active links contained in this email were disabled. > Please verify the identity of the sender, and confirm the > authenticity > > of all links > > contained within the message prior to copying and > pasting the address to a Web browser. > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Yes I am suggesting that if the country of origin of > the work does not assign copyright to the work then no copyright is > > assigned world- > > wide. My reasoning is that there is no entity to assign > that copyright to. > > > > An example in a different field might support my > argument. > > > > In the Netherlands we automatically assign (not > transfer, which is important here) any IP rights of the employee to the > > employer if works > > are created within the duties of the employee. That > means that the employer is the rights holder. This rights holder is > > consequently also > > recognised as the rights holder in other jurisdictions. > Who might, given a similar situation in their own jurisdiction, > > normally assign the > > right to the employee. > > > > Now if there is no rights holder to begin with (the > U.S. waives it rights on government produced works as I understand, > > the Netherlands > > government does the same), then no foreign rights can > be assigned as well. Hence the work must be in the public > domain > > world wide. > > > > I have more experience with Creative Commons-licenses > than with Open Source license, but in CC licenses the license > > exists for the > > duration of the right. I assume all Open Source > licenses are basically the same in this regard. In that sense it does not > > matter which license > > is applied as the license is immediately void, since > there is no underlying right to license. > > > > Finally, in the past I have advised the dutch > government to adopt CC0 to make the public domain status of their works > > clear. They have > > adopted this since ~2011 on their main site: > Caution-Caution-Caution-https://www.government.nl/copyright < Caution- > https://www.government.nl/copyright > < caution-Caution- > > Caution-https://www.government.nl/copyright < > Caution-https://www.government.nl/copyright > > < Caution- > > Caution-Caution-https://www.government.nl/copyright < > Caution-https://www.government.nl/copyright > < Caution- > Caution-https://www.government.nl/copyright < > Caution-https://www.government.nl/copyright > > > (english version). I > > advise the US army does something similar as well. > > > > Regards, > > > > Maarten Zeinstra > > > > -- > > Kennisland | Caution-Caution-Caution-www.kl.nl < > Caution-http://Caution-Caution-Caution-www.kl.nl > < Caution- > Caution-http://caution-Caution-Caution-www.kl.nl/ < > Caution-http://caution-Caution-Caution-www.kl.nl/ > > < Caution-Caution- > > Caution-http://www.kl.nl < Caution-http://www.kl.nl > < > caution-Caution-Caution-http://www.kl.nl < Caution-http://www.kl.nl > > > > | t +31205756720 | m +31643053919 | @mzeinstra > > > > > > On 24 Jul 2016, at 08:26, Philippe Ombredanne > <pombreda...@nexb.com < Caution-mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com > > < Caution-Caution-mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com < > > Caution-mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com > > > > < Caution-Caution-Caution-mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com < > Caution-mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com > < Caution-Caution- > mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com < Caution-mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 11:23 PM, Lawrence Rosen > <lro...@rosenlaw.com < Caution-mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com > < > Caution-Caution-mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com < > Caution-mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com > > < > > Caution-Caution-Caution-mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com < > Caution-mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com > < Caution-Caution- > mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com < Caution-mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > It is true that this public domain result doesn't apply > outside the U.S. But > > if you apply a valid open source license to it – such > as Apache 2.0 – that > > should be good enough for everyone who doesn't live in > the U.S. and > > irrelevant for us here. > > > > > > > > Larry, are you suggesting that Cem considers using > some statement more > > or less like this, rather than a new license? > > This U.S. Federal Government work is not copyrighted > and dedicated > > to the public domain in the USA. Alternatively, the > Apache-2.0 > > license applies > > outside of the USA ? > > > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Maarten Zeinstra > <m...@kl.nl < Caution-mailto:m...@kl.nl > < Caution-Caution- > mailto:m...@kl.nl < Caution-mailto:m...@kl.nl > > < Caution-Caution- > > Caution-mailto:m...@kl.nl < Caution-mailto:m...@kl.nl > < > Caution-Caution-mailto:m...@kl.nl < Caution-mailto:m...@kl.nl > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Is that the correct interpretation of the Berne > convention? The convention > > assigns copyright to foreigners of a signatory state > with at least as strong > > protection as own nationals. Since US government does > not attract copyright > > I am unsure if they can attract copyright in other > jurisdictions. > > > > > > > > Maarten, are you suggesting then that the lack of > copyright for a U.S. Federal > > Government work would just then apply elsewhere too and > that using an > > alternative Apache license would not even be needed? > > > > -- > > Cordially > > Philippe Ombredanne > > > > +1 650 799 0949 | pombreda...@nexb.com < > Caution-Caution-mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com < Caution- > mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com > > < Caution-Caution- > > Caution-mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com < > Caution-mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com > < Caution-Caution- > mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com < Caution-mailto:pombreda...@nexb.com > > > > > DejaCode : What's in your code?! at > Caution-Caution-Caution-http://www.dejacode.com < Caution- > http://www.dejacode.com > < caution-Caution- > > Caution-http://www.dejacode.com < Caution-http://www.dejacode.com > > > < Caution-Caution-Caution- > http://www.dejacode.com < Caution-http://www.dejacode.com > < > caution-Caution-Caution-http://www.dejacode.com < Caution- > http://www.dejacode.com > > > > > nexB Inc. at > Caution-Caution-Caution-http://www.nexb.com < Caution-http://www.nexb.com > > < caution-Caution- > Caution-http://www.nexb.com < Caution-http://www.nexb.com > > < > Caution-Caution- > > Caution-http://www.nexb.com < Caution-http://www.nexb.com > < > caution-Caution-Caution-http://www.nexb.com < Caution- > http://www.nexb.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > License-discuss mailing list > > License-discuss@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:License-discuss@opensource.org > < > Caution-Caution-mailto:License- > disc...@opensource.org < Caution-mailto:License-discuss@opensource.org > > > < Caution-Caution-Caution-mailto:License- < Caution- > mailto:License- > > > disc...@opensource.org < Caution-mailto:disc...@opensource.org > < > Caution-Caution-mailto:License- > disc...@opensource.org < Caution-mailto:License-discuss@opensource.org > > > > > > Caution-Caution-Caution-https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > < Caution- > https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > < > caution-Caution- > > > Caution-https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > < Caution-https://lists.opensource.org/cgi- > bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > License-discuss mailing list > > License-discuss@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:License-discuss@opensource.org > < > Caution-Caution-mailto:License- > disc...@opensource.org < Caution-mailto:License-discuss@opensource.org > > > > > Caution-Caution-https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > < Caution- > https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > < > Caution-Caution-https://lists.opensource.org/cgi- < Caution- > https://lists.opensource.org/cgi- > > > bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > License-discuss@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:License-discuss@opensource.org > > > Caution-https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > < Caution-https://lists.opensource.org/cgi- > bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > > > >
U.S. Army Research Laboratory Open Source License (ARL OSL)
Version 0.4.0, July 2016
http://no/URL/as/yet
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION
1. Definitions.
"License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction,
and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document.
"Licensor" shall mean the project originator or entity authorized by
the project originator that is granting the License.
"Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all
other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common
control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition,
"control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the
direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or
otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the
outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity.
"You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity
exercising permissions granted by this License.
"Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications,
including but not limited to software source code, documentation
source, and configuration files.
"Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical
transformation or translation of a Source form, including but
not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation,
and conversions to other media types.
"Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or
Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a
notice that is included in or attached to the work
(an example is provided in the Appendix below).
"Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object
form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the
editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes
of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain
separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of,
the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
"Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including
the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions
to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally
submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the author
or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of
the author. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted"
means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent
to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to
communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems,
and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the
Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but
excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise
designated in writing by the author as "Not a Contribution."
"Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity
on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and
subsequently incorporated within the Work.
2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
this License, where copyright exists, each Contributor hereby grants to
You a perpetual,
worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of,
publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the
Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.
3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
(except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made,
use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work,
where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable
by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their
Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s)
with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You
institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work
or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct
or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses
granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate
as of the date such litigation is filed.
4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the
Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without
modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You
meet the following conditions:
(a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or
Derivative Works a copy of this License; and
(b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices
stating that You changed the files; and
(c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works
that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and
attribution notices from the Source form of the Work,
excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of
the Derivative Works; and
(d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,
within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents
of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
as modifying the License.
You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and
may provide additional or different license terms and conditions
for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or
for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use,
reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with
the conditions stated in this License.
5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,
any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work
by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of
this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify
the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
with Licensor regarding such Contributions.
6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade
names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor,
except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the
origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.
7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or
agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each
Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions
of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the
appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any
risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License.
8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory,
whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise,
unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly
negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be
liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special,
incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a
result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the
Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill,
work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all
other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor
has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing
the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,
and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,
or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this
License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only
on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf
of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,
defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability
incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason
of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability.
10. All or part of this work is in the public domain and not subject
to copyright. If any part of this work is deemed copyrightable,
now or in the future, its Contributors agree that such copyrightable
parts may be distributed under the terms of this License.
END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
APPENDIX: How to apply the U.S. Army Research Laboratory Open Source License
(ARL OSL) to your work.
To apply the ARL OSL to your work, attach the following
boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
the brackets!) The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
same "printed page" as the notice for easier
identification within third-party archives.
[yyyy] [name of Licensor]
Licensed under the the U.S. Army Research Laboratory Open Source License
(ARL OSL), Version 0.4.0 (the "License");
you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://no/URL/as/yet
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
limitations under the License.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
