Comments on: The Open Software License 3.0 https://opensource.org/license/osl-3-0-php The steward of the Open Source Definition, setting the foundation for the Open Source Software ecosystem. Sun, 25 Jun 2023 17:25:43 +0000 hourly 1 By: nelson https://opensource.org/license/osl-3-0-php#comment-281 Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:58:09 +0000 https://opensource.org/osl-3-0-php/#comment-281 In reply to primordialsoup77.

No. What it does is bring
No. What it does is bring public performance into the reciprocal nature of the license. If you make the execution of the program available to anyone, so must you also make the source of the program available to them. Of course you’re allowed to charge for either one; but you’re not allowed to restrict redistribution.

]]> By: nelson https://opensource.org/license/osl-3-0-php#comment-280 Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:55:54 +0000 https://opensource.org/osl-3-0-php/#comment-280 In reply to elidoran.

Yes, the license asks you to
Yes, the license asks you to try to get affirmative assent. That’s because the state of the law relative to shrink-wrap licenses is still in flux, whereas if you have assent, that falls under contract law and is well understood. But so what? It doesn’t *require* you to succeed, it only requires you to try.

Now, as for why the FSF doesn’t like it. There can be only one reciprocal license, and for the FSF, it’s the GPL. As long as they’re promoting the GPL, they must necessarily diss any other reciprocal licenses.

]]> By: elidoran https://opensource.org/license/osl-3-0-php#comment-279 Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:08:08 +0000 https://opensource.org/osl-3-0-php/#comment-279 License (Mis?)Interpretation
I am reviewing available open source licenses and I encountered a reference to the Open Software License that doesn’t seem accurate. Reading at fsf.org about license compatibilities it describes why OSL 3.0 is incompatibile with GPLv3, and, it goes on to say “We urge you not to use the Open Software License for software you write.”

This is very strong language.

Essentially it says OSL 3.0 “requires distributors to try to obtain explicit assent to the license”. It also goes on to say that some normal events surrounding open source software violates the license. This seems like misinterpretation.

Please, clarify this issue?

View their full message here:

http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses

]]> By: primordialsoup77 https://opensource.org/license/osl-3-0-php#comment-248 Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:50:00 +0000 https://opensource.org/osl-3-0-php/#comment-248 Limitations of license
Does this license prevent me from offering a piece of OSL software (e.g. Magento) in an application service provider context? For example, if I have a server where I set up the OSL software for each client and charge them a fee to use it (so long as I also offer the the source code plus any of my modifications under OSL to the end user)?

]]> By: techdivision https://opensource.org/license/osl-3-0-php#comment-242 Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:14:00 +0000 https://opensource.org/osl-3-0-php/#comment-242 OSL vs. GPL
We´re searching for an easy-to-understand overview of OSL and GPL – with the main differences, advantages and disadvantages of each. Does anyone know such a document? There are some new software-tools published under OSL and nobody knows what this really mean. We´re thankful for every hint…

http://www.techdivision.com

]]>