Unlicense not to be reviewed by the OSI

[Gioele Barabucci]

It looks like the thread from the license-***@opensource.org ml
somehow did not get to this mailing list.

Unlicense will not be reviewed by the OSI because it is a "crayon"
licence (i.e. drafted by non legal professionals). Such licences have
been problematic in the past.
http://projects.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2012-January/000047.html

Although Unlicense will not be reviewed, some (supposed) flaws have been
highlighted.
http://projects.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2012-January/000052.html

To summarise: Unlicense has little chance of being reviewed by the OSI,
let alone approved.

In the same news, CC0 has been withdrawn from the OSI process.
http://projects.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2012-February/000233.html

All this is sad, it is 2012 and yet there are no easy ways (backed by
major organisations) to dedicate software to the public domain .

--
Gioele Barabucci <***@svario.it>

[Mike Linksvayer]

Post by Gioele Barabucci
did not get to this mailing list.

I mentioned it, but following up to a very old thread
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/unlicense/an9PHJ0NGxA/5xNx1k09_WUJ

Post by Gioele Barabucci
Unlicense will not be reviewed by the OSI because it is a "crayon" licence
(i.e. drafted by non legal professionals). Such licences have been
problematic in the past.
http://projects.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2012-January/000047.html
Although Unlicense will not be reviewed, some (supposed) flaws have been
highlighted.
http://projects.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2012-January/000052.html
To summarise: Unlicense has little chance of being reviewed by the OSI, let
alone approved.

It can be reviewed if someone submits it. If someone does, I'd expect
criticism of it to be harsh.

Post by Gioele Barabucci
In the same news, CC0 has been withdrawn from the OSI process.
http://projects.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2012-February/000233.html
All this is sad, it is 2012 and yet there are no easy ways (backed by major
organisations) to dedicate software to the public domain .

A bit sad, but having the backing of a large organization is not
strictly necessary; obviously a number of projects are using
Unlicense, Ampify Unlicense, CC0, various ad hoc public domain
dedications, without OSI approval. I think it is a good thing in the
longer term, if it spurs development of more aggressive public domain
dedications ... I'lll mention again the blog post where I expanded on
this http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2012/02/25/permissions/

Mike