[legal] Meeting Notes from June 5th

Simon Josefsson simon at josefsson.org
Sun Jun 17 23:46:28 UTC 2007


My thinking was based on the recognition that OpenID's goal was intended
to be (quoting the initial intent) 'to release every part of this under
the most liberal licenses possible'.  If the license you choose is not
compatible with the GPL and BSD licenses, I think you are making a big
step away from the initial intentions around licensing.

If the above isn't a sufficient argument, there are practical situations
where GPL compatibility is an issues.  Examples from the top of my head:

* Documentation.  Plenty of documentation is available under the GPL.
  Being able to incorporate portions of the OpenID specification, to
  explain the OpenID concepts, is useful.  I see no reason why this
  shouldn't be allowed, and plenty of reasons to allow it.

* Code-like parts.  Some portions of the specifications is actually
  things that MUST be included in implementations.  I'm thinking mostly
  of the XML schema, but there are other examples, such as example XML
  snippets or example code.

* Including the OpenID specification in distributions such as Debian or
  gNewSense.  Debian evaluate the license of everything that goes into
  their distribution based on the DFSG, and things determined to be
  'non-free' by them won't be included in the main archive.

Licensing the specification under a set of licenses that include
the(L)GPL, BSD, CC-BY, etc will help to avoid legal headaches for
implementers and distributors of OpenID.

Thanks for your consideration,

"Gabe Wachob" <gabe.wachob at amsoft.net> writes:

> Simon-
> I'm not sure why we care about GPL compatibility. This is a spec, not
> software and the spec is never going to be part of another project or used
> by another project, except by reference, as far as I can figure. I'm not
> sure why software licenses are being discussed here at all, to be honest.
> Can you describe what the thinking is here? 
> I agree that preserving flexibility for submission to IETF is probably
> important. 
> 	-Gabe
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: legal-bounces at openid.net [mailto:legal-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf
>> Of Simon Josefsson
>> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 7:31 AM
>> To: Recordon, David
>> Cc: legal at openid.net
>> Subject: Re: [legal] Meeting Notes from June 5th
>> Hi!  I reviewed the copyright aspect of the policy, and it looks good
>> generally.  The only thing I can suggest that you could spend time
>> thinking more closely about is:
>> * Exactly which license are you going to use. A 'Creative Commons'
>> style license may imply restrictions for commercial use, which I
>> believe would be unfortunate.  There is also a problem with the CC-*
>> licenses that it may not be compatible with GPL and other free
>> software licenses, I believe Debian may consider CC-* as non-free.
>> I humbly suggest that you triple-license the standard under the CC-
>> BY, the GPL, and the revised BSD license.  If you want brevity, you
>> could quad-license it, with the fourth license being the following
>> brief license (the GNU project recommends this for certain works):
>> Copying and distribution of this file, with or without modification,
>> are permitted in any medium without royalty provided the copyright
>> notice and this notice are preserved.
>> * Be aware that the IETF copyright rules by default forbid external
>> copyright notices.  Copyright notices are required to be present on
>> all copies according to most (if not all) free licenses (including
>> CC).  If the IAB is queried, the IETF may make an exception (although
>> they have refused to make exceptions in the past).  This means that
>> you'll have to ask the IAB to make an exception for adding the
>> copyright notices for each OpenID specification contributor if the
>> OpenID specification is ever offered to the IETF.
>> Alternatively, and perhaps easier, is to require that OpenID
>> contributors license their contribution under a dual-license of
>> (e.g.) CC-BY (and/or all of the above licenses too) _and_ a license
>> that allows the work to be submitted into the IETF.
>> Thanks,
>> Simon
>> On 15 jun 2007, at 15.39, Recordon, David wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > On June 5th we hosted a meeting to continue the review of the IPR
>> > Policy
>> > proposal.  Notes from this meeting can be found at
>> > http://openid.net/wiki/index.php/IPR_Policy_Meeting_June_5.
>> >
>> > The next step will be drafting a second version of this policy and
>> > continuing the feedback process with an even wider group of the
>> > community.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > --David
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > legal mailing list
>> > legal at openid.net
>> > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/legal
>> _______________________________________________
>> legal mailing list
>> legal at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/legal

More information about the legal mailing list