[jdev] Re: JOSL 1.1?

[Justin]

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

>
>It seems there are two issues here:
>
>1. Code ownership / stewardship
>  
>
jabberstudio.org anyone?  Yeah, its not 'officially' part of the JSF, 
but for all intents and purposes it is. This is a bit of an odd issue, 
that really doesn't make much sense.

Under what OSI approved license, can the licensee's right to use the 
software be revoke if the licensee is not violating any of the license 
terms? (was that parsable?)

Given recent headlines over the past few months, will the JSF offer 
indemnification of said code?

If the JSF is going to start owning large amounts of pseudo-high risk 
IP, then it should be dealt with like a lamb approaching a lion.

IMO, the JSF should not become a source code escrow manager.

>2. Code licensing / terms of use
>  
>
Just make the license be OSI approved. Done, end of story.

>I really meant to raise issue #1. Is there a legitimate role for the JSF
>as a trusted third party for open-source code developed in the Jabber
>community? It seems to me that the JSF could do this no matter what the
>code license (terms of use) is.
>  
>
I think this has passed the risk/liability threshold. Claiming ownership 
of IP that someone else created is asking for problems we are ill 
equipped to deal with.

>A subsidiary issue is whether we might want to develop JOSL 1.1 as one
>license that would enable the JSF to function as what Larry Lessig calls
>an "intellectual property conservancy".
>  
>
Will Larry Lessig do pro-bono work for the JSF?

Justin