Dojo Foundation Committers:

I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


Background
----------
OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers using
a public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional open source
license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the OpenRecord project
agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the AFL, and the Dojo
Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord continue using the PDD
as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


Problems
--------
Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
is problematic.)


Solutions
---------
I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop running
OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using the PDD for new
code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo Foundation should
instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code under an AFL+BSD
dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is distributed.

The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to be in
the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would be a
derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not be placed
in the public domain.

I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and
Dylan, and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a
green light from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license
issues with me for the past year.


The measure to vote on
----------------------
Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


Voting rules
------------
* In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
Project.
* Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
the message.
* A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
* Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
received by list archiving software like gmane.

Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not sure of
your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in private,
please send e-mail to me directly.

Thanks,
Brian Skinner

Search Discussions

  • Owen Williams at Aug 22, 2006 at 3:13 pm
    +1

    -------------------------
    Whenever I despair, I remember that the way of truth and love has
    always won. There may be tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they
    may seem invincible, but in the end, they always fail. Think of it:
    always. -- Mohandas K. Ghandi

    On Aug 22, 2006, at 2:10 PM, Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:

    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


    Background
    ----------
    OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers
    using a public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional
    open source license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the
    OpenRecord project agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the
    AFL, and the Dojo Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord
    continue using the PDD as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


    Problems
    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the
    public domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD
    in combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been
    hearing from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons
    and the Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more
    of the legal details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary
    about *why* the PDD is problematic.)


    Solutions
    ---------
    I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop
    running OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using
    the PDD for new code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo
    Foundation should instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code
    under an AFL+BSD dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is
    distributed.

    The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to
    be in the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would
    be a derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not
    be placed in the public domain.

    I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and
    Dylan, and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a
    green light from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license
    issues with me for the past year.


    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project
    as a public domain project, and from this point forward distribute
    the OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the
    Academic Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


    Voting rules
    ------------
    * In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
    Project.
    * Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
    Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
    the message.
    * A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
    * Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
    message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
    received by list archiving software like gmane.

    Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not
    sure of your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in
    private, please send e-mail to me directly.

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner


    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
  • Scott J. Miles at Aug 22, 2006 at 3:16 pm
    +1

    Regards,
    Scott J. Miles
    TurboAjax Group
    http://www.turboajax.com

    -----Original Message-----
    From: dojo-contributors-bounces@dojotoolkit.org
    On Behalf Of Brian
    Douglas Skinner
    Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 2:10 PM
    To: dojo dev.
    Subject: [dojo-contributors] [vote] distribute OpenRecord using AFL+BSD

    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    <snip>

    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
    public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
    OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
    Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?

    <snip>

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner
  • Torrey Rice at Aug 22, 2006 at 3:19 pm
    +1

    Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:
    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


    Background
    ----------
    OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers using a
    public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional open source
    license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the OpenRecord project
    agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the AFL, and the Dojo
    Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord continue using the PDD
    as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


    Problems
    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
    domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
    combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
    from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
    Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
    details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
    is problematic.)


    Solutions
    ---------
    I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop running
    OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using the PDD for new
    code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo Foundation should
    instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code under an AFL+BSD
    dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is distributed.

    The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to be in
    the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would be a
    derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not be placed
    in the public domain.

    I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and Dylan,
    and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a green light
    from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license issues with me
    for the past year.


    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
    public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
    OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
    Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


    Voting rules
    ------------
    * In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
    Project.
    * Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
    Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
    the message.
    * A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
    * Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
    message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
    received by list archiving software like gmane.

    Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not sure of
    your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in private,
    please send e-mail to me directly.

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner


    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors

  • Alex Russell at Aug 22, 2006 at 3:31 pm
    +1

    Thanks for all your hard work in getting these issues figured out to
    everyone's satisfaction. Putting the "could we use the Public Domain?"
    question to rest makes life that much less complicated for everyone.

    Regards
    On Tuesday 22 August 2006 2:10 pm, Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:
    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...
    --
    Alex Russell
    alex@sitepen.com A99F 8785 F491 D5FD 04D7 ACD9 4158 FFDF 2894 6876
    alex@dojotoolkit.org BE03 E88D EABB 2116 CC49 8259 CF78 E242 59C3 9723
    -------------- next part --------------
    A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
    Name: not available
    Type: application/pgp-signature
    Size: 186 bytes
    Desc: not available
    Url : http://dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20060822/4a3df334/attachment.pgp
  • Dylan Schiemann at Aug 22, 2006 at 4:09 pm
    +1

    Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:
    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


    Background
    ----------
    OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers using a
    public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional open source
    license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the OpenRecord project
    agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the AFL, and the Dojo
    Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord continue using the PDD
    as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


    Problems
    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
    domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
    combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
    from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
    Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
    details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
    is problematic.)


    Solutions
    ---------
    I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop running
    OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using the PDD for new
    code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo Foundation should
    instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code under an AFL+BSD
    dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is distributed.

    The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to be in
    the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would be a
    derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not be placed
    in the public domain.

    I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and Dylan,
    and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a green light
    from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license issues with me
    for the past year.


    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
    public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
    OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
    Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


    Voting rules
    ------------
    * In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
    Project.
    * Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
    Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
    the message.
    * A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
    * Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
    message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
    received by list archiving software like gmane.

    Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not sure of
    your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in private,
    please send e-mail to me directly.

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner


    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
  • Jesse Kuhnert at Aug 22, 2006 at 4:17 pm
    +1
    On 8/22/06, Dylan Schiemann wrote:

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    +1

    Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:
    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


    Background
    ----------
    OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers using a
    public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional open source
    license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the OpenRecord project
    agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the AFL, and the Dojo
    Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord continue using the PDD
    as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


    Problems
    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
    domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
    combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
    from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
    Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
    details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
    is problematic.)


    Solutions
    ---------
    I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop running
    OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using the PDD for new
    code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo Foundation should
    instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code under an AFL+BSD
    dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is distributed.

    The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to be in
    the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would be a
    derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not be placed
    in the public domain.

    I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and Dylan,
    and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a green light
    from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license issues with me
    for the past year.


    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
    public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
    OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
    Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


    Voting rules
    ------------
    * In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
    Project.
    * Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
    Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
    the message.
    * A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
    * Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
    message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
    received by list archiving software like gmane.

    Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not sure of
    your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in private,
    please send e-mail to me directly.

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner


    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

    iD8DBQFE64CZ8nLgh/JJsxERAqoHAJ47gciLm1APlM0upT1IiGUHUUOBPwCfUT3K
    DZ9V2n8xQMSIHAZj8DSJcYU=
    =gcve
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors


    --
    Jesse Kuhnert
    Tapestry/Dojo/(and a dash of TestNG), team member/developer

    Open source based consulting work centered around
    dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind.
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: http://dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20060822/b9849ca2/attachment-0001.html
  • Tom Trenka at Aug 22, 2006 at 4:26 pm
    +1
    On 8/22/06, Dylan Schiemann wrote:

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    +1

    Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:
    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


    Background
    ----------
    OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers using a
    public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional open source
    license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the OpenRecord project
    agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the AFL, and the Dojo
    Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord continue using the PDD
    as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


    Problems
    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
    domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
    combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
    from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
    Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
    details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
    is problematic.)


    Solutions
    ---------
    I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop running
    OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using the PDD for new
    code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo Foundation should
    instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code under an AFL+BSD
    dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is distributed.

    The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to be in
    the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would be a
    derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not be placed
    in the public domain.

    I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and Dylan,
    and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a green light
    from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license issues with me
    for the past year.


    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
    public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
    OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
    Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


    Voting rules
    ------------
    * In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
    Project.
    * Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
    Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
    the message.
    * A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
    * Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
    message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
    received by list archiving software like gmane.

    Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not sure of
    your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in private,
    please send e-mail to me directly.

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner


    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

    iD8DBQFE64CZ8nLgh/JJsxERAqoHAJ47gciLm1APlM0upT1IiGUHUUOBPwCfUT3K
    DZ9V2n8xQMSIHAZj8DSJcYU=
    =gcve
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: http://dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20060822/f1cb685e/attachment.html
  • Dustin Machi at Aug 22, 2006 at 4:47 pm
    +1
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    +1

    Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:
    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


    Background
    ----------
    OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers using a
    public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional open source
    license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the OpenRecord project
    agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the AFL, and the Dojo
    Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord continue using the PDD
    as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


    Problems
    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
    domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
    combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
    from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
    Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
    details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
    is problematic.)


    Solutions
    ---------
    I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop running
    OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using the PDD for new
    code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo Foundation should
    instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code under an AFL+BSD
    dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is distributed.

    The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to be in
    the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would be a
    derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not be placed
    in the public domain.

    I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and Dylan,
    and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a
    green light
    from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license issues with me
    for the past year.


    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
    public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
    OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
    Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


    Voting rules
    ------------
    * In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
    Project.
    * Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
    Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
    the message.
    * A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
    * Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
    message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
    received by list archiving software like gmane.

    Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not sure of
    your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in private,
    please send e-mail to me directly.

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner


    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
    <http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors>
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

    iD8DBQFE64CZ8nLgh/JJsxERAqoHAJ47gciLm1APlM0upT1IiGUHUUOBPwCfUT3K
    DZ9V2n8xQMSIHAZj8DSJcYU=
    =gcve
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors



    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
  • Eugene Lazutkin at Aug 22, 2006 at 8:56 pm
    +1.

    Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:
    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


    Background
    ----------
    OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers using a
    public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional open source
    license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the OpenRecord project
    agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the AFL, and the Dojo
    Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord continue using the PDD
    as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


    Problems
    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
    domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
    combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
    from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
    Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
    details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
    is problematic.)


    Solutions
    ---------
    I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop running
    OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using the PDD for new
    code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo Foundation should
    instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code under an AFL+BSD
    dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is distributed.

    The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to be in
    the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would be a
    derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not be placed
    in the public domain.

    I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and Dylan,
    and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a green light
    from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license issues with me
    for the past year.


    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
    public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
    OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
    Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


    Voting rules
    ------------
    * In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
    Project.
    * Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
    Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
    the message.
    * A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
    * Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
    message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
    received by list archiving software like gmane.

    Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not sure of
    your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in private,
    please send e-mail to me directly.

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner
  • Bryan Forbes at Aug 23, 2006 at 12:39 am
    +1
    On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 21:56 -0500, Eugene Lazutkin wrote:
    +1.

    Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:
    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


    Background
    ----------
    OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers using a
    public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional open source
    license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the OpenRecord project
    agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the AFL, and the Dojo
    Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord continue using the PDD
    as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


    Problems
    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
    domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
    combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
    from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
    Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
    details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
    is problematic.)


    Solutions
    ---------
    I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop running
    OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using the PDD for new
    code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo Foundation should
    instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code under an AFL+BSD
    dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is distributed.

    The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to be in
    the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would be a
    derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not be placed
    in the public domain.

    I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and Dylan,
    and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a green light
    from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license issues with me
    for the past year.


    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
    public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
    OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
    Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


    Voting rules
    ------------
    * In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
    Project.
    * Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
    Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
    the message.
    * A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
    * Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
    message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
    received by list archiving software like gmane.

    Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not sure of
    your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in private,
    please send e-mail to me directly.

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner
    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
    --
    ======================================================================
    Bryan Forbes
    bryan@reigndropsfall.net
    http://www.reigndropsfall.net

    "It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless
    minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."
    - Samuel Adams, an architect of the Constitution

    Key fingerprint = 3D7D B728 713A BB7B B8B1 5B61 3888 17E0 70CA 0F3D
    -------------- next part --------------
    A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
    Name: not available
    Type: application/pgp-signature
    Size: 191 bytes
    Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
    Url : http://dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20060823/188cb914/attachment.pgp
  • Adam L. Peller at Aug 23, 2006 at 7:30 am
    +1
    On 8/22/06, Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:

    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


    Background
    ----------
    OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers using
    a public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional open source
    license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the OpenRecord project
    agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the AFL, and the Dojo
    Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord continue using the PDD
    as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


    Problems
    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
    domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
    combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
    from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
    Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
    details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
    is problematic.)


    Solutions
    ---------
    I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop running
    OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using the PDD for new
    code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo Foundation should
    instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code under an AFL+BSD
    dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is distributed.

    The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to be in
    the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would be a
    derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not be placed
    in the public domain.

    I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and
    Dylan, and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a
    green light from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license
    issues with me for the past year.


    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
    public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
    OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
    Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


    Voting rules
    ------------
    * In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
    Project.
    * Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
    Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
    the message.
    * A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
    * Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
    message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
    received by list archiving software like gmane.

    Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not sure of
    your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in private,
    please send e-mail to me directly.

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner


    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors@dojotoolkit.org
    http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: http://dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20060823/e284749a/attachment-0001.html
  • Brian Douglas Skinner at Aug 23, 2006 at 2:24 pm

    I can post a quick summary about *why* the public domain
    dedication (PDD) is problematic.
    For people who are interested, here's a quick summary about why the
    public domain dedication is problematic...

    ~ Brian

    -----------------------------------------------------
    In countries like the United States and India it is possible to place
    software in the public domain. In these countries there is a statutory
    framework for donating software to the public domain. However, there
    are a number of problems...

    (A) Moral rights problems

    In some jurisdictions, including Germany, it is impossible for an author
    to place a work completely in the public domain. An author cannot
    entirely relinquish copyright because the author automatically retains
    "moral rights".

    (B) Liability problems

    Placing software in the public domain is risky for the author because
    the author may retain a "warranty obligation". The author may be held
    liable for flaws in the software, or for a user's mis-use of the
    software. In the US there is no statutory mechanism for placing
    software in the public domain without incurring a risk of liability. In
    contrast, by using an open source license, the license can explicitly
    disclaim warranties.

    (C) Retraction problems

    When an author places a work in the public domain, that may be
    considered to be a gift, rather than a legal agreement. That gift may
    be an "illusory and unenforceable promise" that could be retracted by
    the author at any time. Users might refrain from using the software out
    of fear that the public domain dedication and may someday be retracted.

    (D) OSI certification problems

    The Open Source Initiative (OSI) allows you to label your software as
    "OSI Certified Open Source Software" if the software is distributed
    using an open source license that has been approved by the OSI. The OSI
    has approved about 60 open source licenses, including common licenses
    like the GPL, LGPL, AFL, BSD, MIT, Apache, Mozilla, etc.

    In the 1990s, the OSI explicitly included public domain software as "OSI
    Certified Open Source Software", but in 2001 the OSI changed that
    policy, and now public domain software is not approved as OSI certified.
    That lack of certification creates practical problems. For example,
    the Google "Summer of Code" program will only fund projects where the
    code is released under an OSI approved license.

    (E) Dual-release problems

    It is common for open source projects to "dual-license" their software,
    making the software available under more than one open source license.
    That allows the user to choose the license that best meets their needs.

    Even though the OSI does not certify public domain software, it would
    still be possible to get OSI certification if the software could be
    released using both an OSI certified license and a public domain
    dedication. Unfortunately, that sort of dual-release strategy will not
    work. That dual-release is considered contradictory, because the author
    is necessarily asserting copyright rights by using an open source
    license, while at the same time using a public domain dedication that
    asserts that no one holds the copyright to the software.

    -------------------
    Further reading:
    [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain
    [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:PDWTF
    [3] http://www.zetadev.com/misc/software-public-domain/
    [4] http://www.zetadev.com/misc/software-public-domain/responses.html
    [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights
    [6] http://www.rosenlaw.com/lj16.htm
    [7] http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:3177:ldaadnjlgdmdomdaofhc
  • Brian Douglas Skinner at Aug 23, 2006 at 7:46 pm
    +1 (just for the record)


    Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:
    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


    Background
    ----------
    OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers using a
    public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional open source
    license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the OpenRecord project
    agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the AFL, and the Dojo
    Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord continue using the PDD
    as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


    Problems
    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
    domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
    combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
    from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
    Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
    details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
    is problematic.)


    Solutions
    ---------
    I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop running
    OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using the PDD for new
    code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo Foundation should
    instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code under an AFL+BSD
    dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is distributed.

    The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to be in
    the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would be a
    derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not be placed
    in the public domain.

    I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and Dylan,
    and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a green light
    from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license issues with me
    for the past year.


    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
    public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
    OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
    Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


    Voting rules
    ------------
    * In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
    Project.
    * Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
    Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
    the message.
    * A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
    * Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
    message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
    received by list archiving software like gmane.

    Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not sure of
    your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in private,
    please send e-mail to me directly.

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner
  • Morris at Aug 24, 2006 at 7:18 am
    Brian, thanks for your summary, it is very appreciated.

    Morris.
  • Brian Douglas Skinner at Aug 24, 2006 at 4:29 pm
    Voting on this measure is now closed. The measure passed. The final
    tally is 12 in favor and 0 against, out of about 38 eligible voters.

    I'll send mail to the openrecord-dev list, and I'll check-in a new
    version of OpenRecord with AFL+BSD licensing terms.

    Thanks!
    :o) Brian


    Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:
    Dojo Foundation Committers:

    I'm proposing a change in how we handle the distribution of the
    OpenRecord code, and calling for a vote on the proposal...


    Background
    ----------
    OpenRecord started as a public domain project, with developers using a
    public domain dedication (PDD) instead of a conventional open source
    license. When OpenRecord became a Dojo project, the OpenRecord project
    agreed to distribute OpenRecord code under the AFL, and the Dojo
    Foundation granted a variance to let OpenRecord continue using the PDD
    as well (forming an AFL+PDD dual-"license").


    Problems
    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
    domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
    combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
    from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
    Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
    details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
    is problematic.)


    Solutions
    ---------
    I think the best solution is for the Dojo Foundation to stop running
    OpenRecord as a public domain project, and to stop using the PDD for new
    code being contributed to OpenRecord. The Dojo Foundation should
    instead simply distribute the OpenRecord code under an AFL+BSD
    dual-license, the same way the Toolkit code is distributed.

    The old code in the OpenRecord SVN repository would continue to be in
    the public domain (up to revision N), and revision N+1 would be a
    derivative work that would be AFL+BSD licensed but would not be placed
    in the public domain.

    I've discussed this with the Dojo Foundation officers, Alex and Dylan,
    and they seem fine with the proposal, and I've also gotten a green light
    from Mignon, who has followed these OpenRecord license issues with me
    for the past year.


    The measure to vote on
    ----------------------
    Shall the Dojo Foundation stop operating the OpenRecord project as a
    public domain project, and from this point forward distribute the
    OpenRecord code using a dual-license, under a the terms of the Academic
    Free License and the Amended BSD License dual-license?


    Voting rules
    ------------
    * In order to vote, you must be a committer on a Dojo Foundation
    Project.
    * Voting will take place on this mailing list, via e-mail.
    Respond to this message with a "+1" or "-1" in the body of
    the message.
    * A simple majority of votes cast wins the election.
    * Voting will remain open for 48 hours from the posting if this
    message, as defined by when the message is shown to have been
    received by list archiving software like gmane.

    Please send objections to the rules to this list. If you are not sure of
    your eligibility to vote or would like to cast your vote in private,
    please send e-mail to me directly.

    Thanks,
    Brian Skinner
  • David Ascher at Aug 24, 2006 at 4:35 pm

    On 8/22/06, Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:

    --------
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the public
    domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the PDD in
    combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had been hearing
    from other people, including attorneys at Creative Commons and the
    Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested in more of the legal
    details, let me know, and I can post a quick summary about *why* the PDD
    is problematic.)

    I think that'd be good info to share, and I'm certainly curious to know if
    my understanding matches up...

    -david
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: http://dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20060824/08d1c3ad/attachment.html
  • Brian Douglas Skinner at Aug 24, 2006 at 5:22 pm

    David Ascher wrote:
    On 8/22/06, Brian Douglas Skinner wrote:
    Last week our attorney advised us that continuing to use the
    public domain dedication (PDD) is problematic, as is using the
    PDD in combination with the AFL. That advice confirms what I had
    been hearing from other people, including attorneys at Creative
    Commons and the Software Freedom Law Center. (If you're interested
    in more of the legal details, let me know, and I can post a quick
    summary about *why* the PDD is problematic.)

    I think that'd be good info to share, and I'm certainly curious to know
    if my understanding matches up...
    Yup, I posted a quick summary yesterday, including some links to other
    articles:
    http://dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/2006-August/003648.html

    :o) Brian

Related Discussions

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase