THE SPDX WIKI IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. ALL CONTENT HAS BEEN MOVED TO https://github.com/spdx

Difference between revisions of "Legal Team/License List/Licenses Under Consideration"

From SPDX Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(Convert to MediaWiki syntax)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
<p><strong>1A) Licenses to add?  
+
== Licenses to add? ==
−
<br><em>(Kirstin Newcomer to track progress and lead; GROUP to make decisions; may need to delegate research on particular licenses to others - ongoing, check in on this each call)</em></strong></p>
+
  
−
<ol>
+
''(Kirstin Newcomer to track progress and lead; GROUP to make decisions; may need to delegate research on particular licenses to others - ongoing, check in on this each call)'''''
−
<li>to add? (from FSF list) - Unicode LIcense Agreement for Data Files and Software – are there other versions or other Unicode licenses?  It does not appear so, based on the info on this page: http://www.unicode.org/copyright.html ...
+
−
--> realized that Fedora has a different Unicode license (for Character Database, Fedora uses short identifier: UCD, found here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:UCD?rd=Licensing/UCD ) than the Unicode license above from the FSF list.  <strong>more research needed</strong> to see if there are others, so can appropriately name, etc.</li>
+
  
−
<li> Zend Engine License v2.0 – are there other versions of this license? See attached document below for summary of research and items to discuss
+
# to add? (from FSF list) - Unicode LIcense Agreement for Data Files and Software – are there other versions or other Unicode licenses? It does not appear so, based on the info on this page: http://www.unicode.org/copyright.html ... → realized that Fedora has a different Unicode license (for Character Database, Fedora uses short identifier: UCD, found here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:UCD?rd=Licensing/UCD ) than the Unicode license above from the FSF list. '''more research needed''' to see if there are others, so can appropriately name, etc.
−
--> suggestion to add Zend Engine License 2.0 and use ZendEngine-2.0 as short identifier, but not enough people on call to decide - will discuss further on next call </li>
+
# Zend Engine License v2.0 – are there other versions of this license? See attached document below for summary of research and items to discuss → suggestion to add Zend Engine License 2.0 and use ZendEngine-2.0 as short identifier, but not enough people on call to decide - will discuss further on next call
 +
# to add? "old" MIT? see http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.licenses.spdx.legal/day=20121201
 +
# Unlicense - see thread here: http://search.gmane.org/?query=unlicense&amp;group=gmane.comp.licenses.spdx.legal
 +
# add US Gov't works - add short identifier to list; see email from David Wheeler
 +
# issue of potential confusion with short identifier "GPL-2.0" meaning GPLv2 only; whereas GPLv2 or later, uses short identifier "GPL-2.0+" should short identifier be changed to "GPL-2.0-only" for symmetry and clarity?
 +
## what would the ramifications of changing a short identifier be? had said we wouldn't not change short identifiers
 +
## alternatively, could add in Notes field for all GNU licenses that short identifier "GPL-2.0" = GPL v2 only for clarification (but will this be "obvious" enough?)
 +
# FLORA License - decided not to add at this point in time, pending completion of license inclusion guidelines. see http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.licenses.spdx.legal/month=20121101 for most recent thread on the topic and meeting minutes where discussed at: [[Legal_Team/Minutes/2012-10-31]]
  
−
<li>to add?  "old" MIT? see http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.licenses.spdx.legal/day=20121201</li>
+
[[Category:Legal]]
−
 
+
−
<li>Unlicense - see thread here: http://search.gmane.org/?query=unlicense&amp;group=gmane.comp.licenses.spdx.legal</li>
+
−
 
+
−
<li>add US Gov't works - add short identifier to list; see email from David Wheeler</li>
+
−
 
+
−
<li>issue of potential confusion with short identifier "GPL-2.0" meaning GPLv2 only; whereas GPLv2 or later, uses short identifier "GPL-2.0+" should short identifier be changed to "GPL-2.0-only" for symmetry and clarity?
+
−
<ol>
+
−
<li>what would the ramifications of changing a short identifier be?  had said we wouldn't not change short identifiers
+
−
<li>alternatively, could add in Notes field for all GNU licenses that short identifier "GPL-2.0" = GPL v2 only for clarification (but will this be "obvious" enough?)</li></ul>
+
−
</li>
+
−
 
+
−
<li>FLORA License - decided not to add at this point in time, pending completion of license inclusion guidelines. see http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.licenses.spdx.legal/month=20121101 for most recent thread on the topic and meeting minutes where discussed at: http://spdx.org/wiki/legal-team-meeting-minutes-2012-10-31</li>
+
−
 
+
−
 
+
−
</ol>
+

Revision as of 17:55, 5 March 2013

Licenses to add?

(Kirstin Newcomer to track progress and lead; GROUP to make decisions; may need to delegate research on particular licenses to others - ongoing, check in on this each call)

  1. to add? (from FSF list) - Unicode LIcense Agreement for Data Files and Software – are there other versions or other Unicode licenses? It does not appear so, based on the info on this page: http://www.unicode.org/copyright.html ... → realized that Fedora has a different Unicode license (for Character Database, Fedora uses short identifier: UCD, found here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:UCD?rd=Licensing/UCD ) than the Unicode license above from the FSF list. more research needed to see if there are others, so can appropriately name, etc.
  2. Zend Engine License v2.0 – are there other versions of this license? See attached document below for summary of research and items to discuss → suggestion to add Zend Engine License 2.0 and use ZendEngine-2.0 as short identifier, but not enough people on call to decide - will discuss further on next call
  3. to add? "old" MIT? see http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.licenses.spdx.legal/day=20121201
  4. Unlicense - see thread here: http://search.gmane.org/?query=unlicense&group=gmane.comp.licenses.spdx.legal
  5. add US Gov't works - add short identifier to list; see email from David Wheeler
  6. issue of potential confusion with short identifier "GPL-2.0" meaning GPLv2 only; whereas GPLv2 or later, uses short identifier "GPL-2.0+" should short identifier be changed to "GPL-2.0-only" for symmetry and clarity?
    1. what would the ramifications of changing a short identifier be? had said we wouldn't not change short identifiers
    2. alternatively, could add in Notes field for all GNU licenses that short identifier "GPL-2.0" = GPL v2 only for clarification (but will this be "obvious" enough?)
  7. FLORA License - decided not to add at this point in time, pending completion of license inclusion guidelines. see http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.licenses.spdx.legal/month=20121101 for most recent thread on the topic and meeting minutes where discussed at: Legal_Team/Minutes/2012-10-31
Retrieved from "https://wiki.spdx.org/index.php?title=Legal_Team/License_List/Licenses_Under_Consideration&oldid=2291"