[Labs-l] Question: json license not free enough?

[Luis Villa]

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Platonides <platonides at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 28/05/13 23:37, Luis Villa wrote:
> > [Background: the json license is neither OSI-open nor FSF-free, and
> > never will be. So we would discourage using it on tool labs. Response to
> > Silke inline.]
> >
> > Free and open source licenses give freedom to the user of the software.
> > The user of the software can then use that freedom however they want -
> > including, of course, limiting their own use. So there is no
> > contradiction here.
> >
> > With regards to this specific license, and the widely-known story about
> > IBM negotiating an exception: Negotiating exceptions to bad licenses is
> > a bad idea, because it encourages people to use bad licenses - it means
> > we pay the penalty for their bad choice, instead of them. We also have
> > limited resources, and it is generally a better use of those resources
> > to encourage the authors to switch to OSI-approved licenses, so that
> > everyone, not just Wikimedia, can benefit and participate.
> >
> > Hope that helps clarify-
> > Luis
>
> The original mail was about a user with javascript validators under json
> license. He is not the © holder of jshint and jslink, just reusing them.
> See
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rillke#Your_tools_on_the_toolserver
>


> IMHO the exception would have to be added to labs terms of use, ‘buying
> an evil license’ still wouldn't be enough.
>

We would get the exception from the copyright holders of the tools for the
exception, not the author of the license or the toollabs user.  Assuming
there are a small number of copyright holders, this is usually possible
(though like I said in the first email, not usually a good idea).

Here, JShint says their license is MIT:
https://github.com/jshint/jshint/blob/master/LICENSE

With one exception, which they (incorrectly) imply is merely "modified MIT":

https://github.com/jshint/jshint/blame/master/src/stable/jshint.js

So the question about who needs to be contacted is not "all contributors to
JSHint", but rather "all contributors to this one file within JSHint" - a
much smaller, possibly doable #.


> We should try to get the tools relicensed under a free license.


That would definitely be best, both for our community and the broader open
source community.

Luis

-- 
Luis Villa
Deputy General Counsel
Wikimedia Foundation
415.839.6885 ext. 6810

NOTICE: *This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you
have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the
mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical
reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community
members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/labs-l/attachments/20130530/3b826ff7/attachment.html>