Discussion:
New License Request
Mike Milinkovich
2014-03-03 16:48:14 UTC
Permalink
Full Name: Eclipse Distribution License
License Short Identifier: EDL-1.0

URL:
http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/edl-v10.php
http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/edl-v10.html

Indicate whether the license is OSI-approved: Yes
http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause

Provide a short explanation regarding the need for this license to be
included on the License List, including identifying at least one program
that uses this license or a prior version of this license.

The EDL-1.0 is used by Eclipse projects with the approval of the Eclipse
Board of Directors. Eclipse Foundation projects that currently use the
EDL-1.0 include:

Orion
Concierge
Eclipselink
Jgit
Lyo
Mosquitto
Run Time Packaging
Paho
RTSC
CDT TCF
--
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich at eclipse.org
+1.613.220.3223

EclipseCon 2014 <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2014>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-legal/attachments/20140303/ff57e6c4/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: eclipsecon-logo-480px-x-60px.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 34856 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <Loading Image...>
-------------- next part --------------
Eclipse Distribution License - v 1.0

Copyright (c) 2007, Eclipse Foundation, Inc. and its licensors.

All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification,
are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

* Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this
list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
* Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice,
this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation
and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
* Neither the name of the Eclipse Foundation, Inc. nor the names of its
contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this
software without specific prior written permission.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND
ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.
IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT,
INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING,
BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF
LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR
OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF
THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
Mike Milinkovich
2014-03-03 17:49:38 UTC
Permalink
I have been out of the loop for a while, but I thought that we were
not going to have separate licenses for exact matches to existing
licenses such as BSD-3-Clause.
I don't follow SPDX closely enough to know such things. If that's the
case, do we simply use the "BSD-3-Clause" identifier for the EDL?
--
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich at eclipse.org
+1.613.220.3223

EclipseCon 2014 <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2014>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-legal/attachments/20140303/3d6f0d2a/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: eclipsecon-logo-480px-x-60px.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 34856 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <Loading Image...>
Dennis Clark
2014-03-03 18:56:29 UTC
Permalink
Mike,

I have recorded your request at
http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/License_List/Licenses_Under_Consideration#Licenses_Under_Consideration


I believe that BSD-3-Clause is your best option. The Legal working group
will make a final decision the next time we review new license requests.

Regards,
Dennis Clark
nexB Inc.
dmclark at nexb.com


On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Mike Milinkovich <
Post by Tom Incorvia
I have been out of the loop for a while, but I thought that we were not
going to have separate licenses for exact matches to existing licenses such
as BSD-3-Clause.
I don't follow SPDX closely enough to know such things. If that's the
case, do we simply use the "BSD-3-Clause" identifier for the EDL?
--
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich at eclipse.org
+1.613.220.3223
[image: EclipseCon 2014] <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2014>
_______________________________________________
Spdx-legal mailing list
Spdx-legal at lists.spdx.org
https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-legal/attachments/20140303/d1bbb584/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: eclipsecon-logo-480px-x-60px.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 34856 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <Loading Image...>
J Lovejoy
2014-03-05 16:56:44 UTC
Permalink
Hi Mike,

Thanks for the request. Dennis and Tom are right - according to your License Matching Guidelines (located here: http://spdx.org/spdx-license-list/matching-guidelines), this would be a BSD-3-Clause. We had actually reviewed this as part of our on-going review of the Fedora list and noted as such in the tracking spreadsheet for the Fedora list https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmVnI0dGKEo1dENVVHFNeG5hQjAyYjQ3bm1VVUdjOFE#gid=1

If you have any other questions, please do not hesitate to ask!

Cheers,
Jilayne


SPDX Legal Team co-lead
opensource at jilayne.com
Mike,
I have recorded your request at http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/License_List/Licenses_Under_Consideration#Licenses_Under_Consideration
I believe that BSD-3-Clause is your best option. The Legal working group will make a final decision the next time we review new license requests.
Regards,
Dennis Clark
nexB Inc.
dmclark at nexb.com
Post by Tom Incorvia
I have been out of the loop for a while, but I thought that we were not going to have separate licenses for exact matches to existing licenses such as BSD-3-Clause.
I don't follow SPDX closely enough to know such things. If that's the case, do we simply use the "BSD-3-Clause" identifier for the EDL?
--
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich at eclipse.org
+1.613.220.3223
<eclipsecon-logo-480px-x-60px.jpg>
_______________________________________________
Spdx-legal mailing list
Spdx-legal at lists.spdx.org
https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
_______________________________________________
Spdx-legal mailing list
Spdx-legal at lists.spdx.org
https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-legal/attachments/20140305/8f777c44/attachment.html>
Mike Milinkovich
2014-03-05 17:08:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by J Lovejoy
If you have any other questions, please do not hesitate to ask!
That's fine. "BSD-3-Clause" is a perfectly good answer.

Thanks everyone for all the help!
--
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich at eclipse.org
+1.613.220.3223

EclipseCon 2014 <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2014>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-legal/attachments/20140305/959e73eb/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: eclipsecon-logo-480px-x-60px.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 34856 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <Loading Image...>
Tom Incorvia
2014-03-03 17:18:14 UTC
Permalink
Hi Mike and SPDX,

I have been out of the loop for a while, but I thought that we were not going to have separate licenses for exact matches to existing licenses such as BSD-3-Clause.

I do realize that this is a prominent BSD-3-Clause template license, but if we include an exact template match that will open us up to logging every BSD-3-Clause - there are thousands. I track 343 different BSD-3-Clause just at Micro Focus.

Has there been a discussion of alternative ways to represent important template-matched licenses?

Tom

Tom Incorvia; tom.incorvia at microfocus.com<mailto:tom.incorvia at microfocus.com>; O: (512) 340-1336; M: (215) 500 8838; Shoretel (Internal): X27015
From: spdx-legal-bounces at lists.spdx.org [mailto:spdx-legal-bounces at lists.spdx.org] On Behalf Of Mike Milinkovich
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 10:48 AM
To: spdx-legal at lists.spdx.org
Cc: Janet Campbell
Subject: New License Request


Full Name: Eclipse Distribution License
License Short Identifier: EDL-1.0

URL:
http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/edl-v10.php
http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/edl-v10.html

Indicate whether the license is OSI-approved: Yes
http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause

Provide a short explanation regarding the need for this license to be included on the License List, including identifying at least one program that uses this license or a prior version of this license.

The EDL-1.0 is used by Eclipse projects with the approval of the Eclipse Board of Directors. Eclipse Foundation projects that currently use the EDL-1.0 include:
Orion
Concierge
Eclipselink
Jgit
Lyo
Mosquitto
Run Time Packaging
Paho
RTSC
CDT TCF
--
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich at eclipse.org<mailto:mike.milinkovich at eclipse.org>
+1.613.220.3223

[EclipseCon 2014]<http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2014>


Click here<https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/MZbqvYs5QwJvpeaetUwhCQ==> to report this email as spam.


This message has been scanned for malware by Websense. www.websense.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-legal/attachments/20140303/9022f6ae/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 34856 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <Loading Image...>
Loading...