1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
|
From - Wed Oct 17 13:27:51 2018
X-Account-Key: account1
X-UIDL: GmailId166832be205bc2bd
X-Mozilla-Status: 1013
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-Mozilla-Keys:
Delivered-To: rob@landley.net
Received: by 2002:ab0:208c:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id r12csp943206uak;
Wed, 17 Oct 2018 10:56:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV61EHdCAKXqiC2g4VHKVIL9kgr4swWkJtL9r6jorwOeN6QWG09j9dd8vuBA2AqOxUrypnI88
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:16a4:: with SMTP id h33-v6mr26279849plh.3.1539798983448;
Wed, 17 Oct 2018 10:56:23 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1539798983; cv=none;
d=google.com; s=arc-20160816;
b=E/rO76Tc0QzdNYVqa3mOrkhv21WxRyex6QvEcEw2ejkTXu3csi2hFDckupiXuJyBYi
zXk7prvMPwpP229CvoeWCl723QCCDRFU0b1S/1Z7gD9I3gk/t6Vnp0U1pJ/oFhUaExlJ
l2/HwgzW0eVnMQsJHKlzP8zNqJhOUFD+xI35NiRa9J1tH0BomncWOz7lTXlvaTED2Vdz
ZHoFuv89BUKCkKGbfm4/O0KTNECK6rK1Db87M/rGCpUQpCQacVr29Lf3AWLQikDR62dB
vCqIMCD3mvRcPPOo8VIN/xyQQ9J4OcBZ/jZ/zfxcbZc11fng8GNHlp33hCxuyKHUwbeT
nOmw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816;
h=date:content-transfer-encoding:content-id:mime-version:comments
:in-reply-to:reply-to:subject:to:from:message-id;
bh=HpIGga40Wz3PXDOHP7PrAJqWHlOoA7xl5QvPk2tjJig=;
b=JdV87WgS3oz/oa3fJSLdgU42ag+CKECK7OuT/DLvHfmwc2XtIMkx99zexEOi3S8DJp
eaxLjf70GfCzWyq2fP11rUjemnTxW9R9efZEkZanvq36rbj7A+3/NmzvYPLwm8bihlke
Gu8/FoVrE8ZANi252MKvejMVYsrYsyEJnO/vmiteVR5wD8mwHtYQnDXmwta6ZhH/ko+t
uWXkHxOxs6y21CElD+40BvkIGGwFNd4FptjTA1T0rgw0PTUB/igdKvvwk1LotqbERJv5
nhNHc47pJ4EU2o7G4yAwBBVETXQYYc8rl259VCKiSuGy0hEKGKweVieTEAe8V+NrZzd2
UV7A==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com;
spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of mckusick@mckusick.com designates 70.36.157.235 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mckusick@mckusick.com
Return-Path: <mckusick@mckusick.com>
Received: from chez.mckusick.com (chez.mckusick.com. [70.36.157.235])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 129-v6si18906639pfd.201.2018.10.17.10.56.23
for <rob@landley.net>
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Wed, 17 Oct 2018 10:56:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of mckusick@mckusick.com designates 70.36.157.235 as permitted sender) client-ip=70.36.157.235;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of mckusick@mckusick.com designates 70.36.157.235 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mckusick@mckusick.com
Received: from chez.mckusick.com (localhost [IPv6:::1])
by chez.mckusick.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w9HI1egQ039009
for <rob@landley.net>; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 11:01:40 -0700 (PDT)
(envelope-from mckusick@mckusick.com)
Message-Id: <201810171801.w9HI1egQ039009@chez.mckusick.com>
From: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>
To: Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>
Subject: Re: License naming question.
X-URL: http://WWW.McKusick.COM/
Reply-To: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>
In-reply-to: <9bf40da7-afb3-d3d6-3759-d1566c99aa20@landley.net>
Comments: In-reply-to Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>
message dated "Tue, 16 Oct 2018 17:57:10 -0500."
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <39007.1539799300.1@chez.mckusick.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 11:01:40 -0700
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MISSING_MID,
UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on chez.mckusick.com
> To: mckusick@mckusick.com
> From: Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>
> Subject: License naming question.
> Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 17:57:10 -0500
> =
> Hi,
> =
> We spoke at Ohio Linuxfest back in 2013 (you attended my Rise and
> Fall of Copyleft talk, and then we talked in the hallway afterwards).
> =
> I _think_ I told you about my plans to try to promote public domain
> equivalent licensing, a concept which has a wikipedia page now:
> =
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain_equivalent_license
> =
> For toybox what I did was take the OpenBSD suggested template license
> off their website and remove the half-sentence requiring people to
> copy that specific license text into derived works, and the resulting
> license made it past Google's lawyers! My toybox project has been
> providing the command line for android since Marshmallow
> (https://lwn.net/Articles/629362/) and we're making progress on
> getting android to build under android, the Bionic libc maintainer
> recently sent me a roadmap update about that:
> =
> https://github.com/landley/toybox/commit/92b359f00057
> =
> I called the resulting license "Zero Clause BSD" (by analogy with
> "Creative Commons Zero" and the existing 4 clause, 3 clause, and 2
> clause BSD licenses), and I even got SPDX approval for it in 2015
> (because Samsung asked me to shortly after Google merged it into
> AOSP, they'd been adding it aftermarket before then and having an
> SPDX identifier for the license simplified their internal bureaucracy).
> =
> Then a couple months after SPDX approved it, somebody _else_ submitted
> the same license to Eric Raymond's old Open Source Initiative using
> "Free" in the name, as in Free Software Foundation. (A sadly loaded
> term these days.)
> =
> I hadn't known they were still in the license approval business
> (they stopped approving new licenses in... 2012? And I remember
> them explicitly _rejecting_ CC0 saying public domain isn't a license,
> which their FAQ still talks about at
> https://opensource.org/faq#public-domain). But they approved the
> toybox license under a different name, then asked SPDX to retroactively
> change their name for it. (SPDX didn't, but OSI refused to admit
> it made a mistake, even though they said they had a policy to keep
> the names in sync. They hadn't done their homework.)
> =
> Now every time the license is considered for a new use, the confusion
> OSI caused tends to derail things:
> =
> https://github.com/david-a-wheeler/spdx-tutorial/issues/1
> =
> When github itself was considering adding 0BSD to its license
> pulldown (which would have been a big win), I was asked what I
> thought of the naming confusion, and I wrote two long things on my
> rationale with lots of links to earlier stuff, which you can read
> here if you'd like:
> =
> https://github.com/github/choosealicense.com/issues/464
> =
> Anyway, I recently decided to ask OSI to admit they made a mistake
> and change their name for the license to match what SPDX did, and
> there was unanimous approval...
> =
> http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.or=
g/2018-September/003519.html
> =
> Until the same guy who was objecting last time showed up to continue
> to object. He ignord the "who used it first" axis, and said he
> wanted to know which name was used more today, and then when he
> lost that argument he said he objects to calling something a BSD
> license that isn't using Berkeley's original wording.
> =
> My question is: do you object to the name "Zero Clause BSD" for a
> public domain equivalent license that's the OpenBSD suggested
> template license with half a sentence removed?
> =
> If you want to stay out of this, I understand. I'm pretty sure I
> asked you this in 2013 before I started pushing the name, and
> wouldn't have if you'd objected then, but that was long ago and the
> water under the bridge is dead...
> =
> Thanks for your time, sorry that took so long to explain. (And even
> longer if you read the big long github choosealicense thread. :)
> =
> Rob
Thanks for the through explanation of the situation.
I have no objections to the name "Zero Clause BSD" for your license.
I hope that you are successful in getting OSI to change their name
for the license to match what SPDX did.
Kirk McKusick
|
