At our last face-to-face meeting, the OSI Board discussed the topic of
FLOSS licenses targeted at specific languages and jurisdictions. As you can
imagine, with the interest in reducing license proliferation, the
conversation was quite lively. However, if we want open source to be a
truly
Presumably the European Union Public Licence was discussed during that meeting
(and I note it here for those who haven't yet come across it).
https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/software/page/eupl/licence-eupl
Whilst I make no comment as to the content of the licence, it boasts official
translations
With regard to language: wouldn't it be more aligned with reducing license
proliferation to work with existing license stewards to encourage
authorized translations? Have there been license submissions in foreign
languages yet, and have those submitters been resistant to the idea of
On 06/05/2015 12:13 PM, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
With regard to jurisdiction: do we have evidence that existing licenses
can't be enforced as per the intent of the license stewards in certain
juridictions because they use terms differently, or there are assumed
defaults in that jurisdiction
4 matches
Mail list logo
