Perhaps the term “exceptions” is confusing & should be renamed. If so, how about “additional terms”?
It seems to me that “exceptions” have both *add* or *remove* requirements, but it appears that others do not. --- David A. Wheeler From: spdx-legal-boun...@lists.spdx.org [mailto:spdx-legal-boun...@lists.spdx.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fontana Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 3:32 PM To: W. Trevor King Cc: SPDX-legal Subject: Re: revised wording for top of exceptions page There was one notorious case of the use of GPLv2 with a permissive and restrictive additional term that was described at the time as an "exception" -- Red Hat's license for Liberation Fonts 1.0. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_fonts#Distribution I wouldn't particularly recommend use of a 'WITH' expression to describe Liberation Fonts 1.0, but might not be the only example of a use of "exception" by a licensor (and the general public too) in this sense in the real world. IOW, there could be multiple cases in the real world of things called "exceptions" that are not "additional permissions". Richard ________________________________ From: "W. Trevor King" <wk...@tremily.us<mailto:wk...@tremily.us>> To: "Phil Odence" <pode...@blackducksoftware.com<mailto:pode...@blackducksoftware.com>> Cc: "SPDX-legal" <spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org<mailto:spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org>> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 2:03:15 PM Subject: Re: revised wording for top of exceptions page On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 12:23:43PM +0000, Phil Odence wrote: The SPDX License List includes a list of Exceptions. These Exceptions are commonly-granted permissions beyond those normally granted in a license. (They are not stand-alone licenses.) Exceptions are added to a license using the License Expression Syntax operator "WITH." This sounds good to me, although I don't see a need to parenthesize the stand-alone sentence. I also think there may be room for confusion around whether “a license” includes the exception or not. And the exception list is distinct from the license list (although both are currently tracked in the same repository). How about: The SPDX Exception List includes a list of Exceptions. These Exceptions are added to a License using the License Expression Syntax operator "WITH" to grant additional permissions beyond those already given in the License that the Exception modifies. If we restrict exceptions to only granting additional permissions, we probably also want to adjust the License Expression wording, which has [1]: Sometimes a set of license terms apply except under special circumstances. In this case, use the binary "WITH" operator to construct a new license expression to represent the special exception situation. The current License Expression wording would cover an exception like “but I grant no license to users whose first name starts with the letter A” which would not be covered by the proposed additional-permissions wording. And it would be good to keep the wording for WITH in the License Expression appendix close to the wording used to introduce the Exception list. Cheers, Trevor [1]: https://spdx.org/spdx-specification-21-web-version#h.jxpfx0ykyb60 -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy _______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org<mailto:Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org> https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
_______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
