The Open Software License, Version 3.0

Posted Aug 25, 2005 7:28 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
In reply to: The Open Software License, Version 3.0 by KaiRo
Parent article: The Open Software License, Version 3.0

But you have a choice.

If my splash screen got unwieldy I have the choice of leaving it out. I don't think the BSD licence lets you do that!

The OSL merely requires that I give *equal* prominence to other peoples copyright as to my own. Should I change the flash screen to read "copyright assorted people, see manual for details", that's perfectly okay according to the OSL. But not according to the 3-clause BSD.

Actually, I think that's a damn neat way of doing things :-)

Cheers,
Wol

The Open Software License, Version 3.0

Posted Aug 31, 2005 22:37 UTC (Wed) by sanjoy (guest, #5026) [Link]

> "That's a damn neat way of doing things"

Then you'll be unhappy that the latest draft of the OSL 3.0
has taken out the new attribution sentence. You're still required
to preserve attribution notices in the source code, though, as
in the OSL 2.1.

I think the OSL is an excellent license. Debian probably thinks
it's nonfree due to the external deployment or patent-defense
clauses (and maybe even the 'express assent' clause) -- both of which I like (I'm not sure about the express-assent clause). But
that just means I think Debian's test for being free is too
strict. The OSL, unlike almost every other free software license,
works equally well for documents as for software, so you can
license your entire free-software package with one license, or you
can use it for textbooks (what I will use it for).