Changes between Version 24 and Version 25 of ApertureLicense

Timestamp:

10/10/05 22:17:14 (19 years ago)

Author:

anonymous

Comment:

--

ApertureLicense

@@ -27 +27 @@
 '''Local jurisdiction''' - we prefer a local court (i.e. Dutch or German, depending on who is involved) rather than one in California (MPL) or New York (CPL).
 
-So far, all these demands are (not coincidentally) met by the [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/osl-2.1.php OSL]. Still, we fear that people may think that, due to how the OSL is formulated, they are required to distribute their own implementations of core APIs such as !DataSource and Extractor under the OSL. We believe this is not the case with the OSL, i.e. that this type of extension does not qualify as a derivative work under copyright law. However, in order to prevent any confusion and discussion in the first place, we propose to publish all core APIs and possibly some classes that cannot be separated from it under the [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/afl-2.1.php ASL] and all concrete implementations under the OSL.
+So far, all these demands are (not coincidentally) met by the [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/osl-2.1.php OSL]. Still, we fear that people may think that, due to how the OSL is formulated, they are required to distribute their own implementations of core APIs such as !DataSource and Extractor under the OSL. We believe this is not the case with the OSL, i.e. that this type of extension does not qualify as a derivative work under copyright law. However, in order to prevent any confusion and discussion in the first place, we propose to publish all core APIs and possibly some classes that cannot be separated from them under the [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/afl-2.1.php ASL] and all concrete implementations under the OSL.
 
 == To Discuss ==
@@ -41 +41 @@
 http://www.opensource.org/licenses/osl-2.1.php
 
+Feedback Aduna: the AFL is identical to the OSL except for the reciprocical demand. In my opinion this makes it clearer why we chose two different licenses to work in parallel: for some part you want the reciprocity, for others you do not. Furthermore, the AFL is in many other places compatible with the requirements outlined above, such as judicially soundness, jurisdiction, patent license and defense, etc., which are at best implicit in the BSD license.
+
 
 == Background Info ==
 
- * [http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch09.pdf Thorough description of OSL and ASL], with comparison to other licenses ((L)GPL, MPL, CPL, ...)
+ * [http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch09.pdf Thorough description of OSL and ASL], with comparison to other licenses ((L)GPL, BSD, MPL, CPL, ...)
  * [http://www.rosenlaw.com/oslbook.htm Overview of other chapters in that book]