Follow-up on Research Items from Last SPDX Legal Meeting (9/5)
On our last SPDX Legal call, I took two items from the license list for further research:
1) BitTorrent Open Source License 1.1: are there multiple versions of this license, and if so, are the different versions really different? (Line 4 in the spreadsheet)
The spreadsheet comments note that there is also a version 1.0 of this license. I can't find any text for or even evidence of a BitTorrent Open Source License version 1.0. Version 1.1 exists now only in archive, either from Wayback Machine or Fedora's website, which is copied from Wayback Machine (I don't know why the spreadsheet says Fedora's link is not active, it seems to be). Aside from the obvious that 1.1 usually follows a 1.0, I can't even find a reference to there ever having been a 1.0 version. If anyone has any insight into the alleged 1.0, that would be helpful. I am leaning towards the idea that if it's so hard to even confirm that 1.0 ever existed, it's not worth including in the license list, at least until someone can find an actual example in the wild.
2) Netizen Open Source License 1.0: is this license really different from MPL 1.1? (Line 12 in the spreadsheet)
I did a doc compare between the Netizen Open Source License 1.1 and MPL 1.1. Aside from the irrelevant differences (names of orgs/parties, some section numbering, capitalization), there are actually two places where they are not the same. One is that the NOSL 1.1 has an additional Section 7.1 with a more detailed warranty disclaimer that MPL 1.1 does not have. Second is that they have different and conflicting choice of law provisions, with NOSL specifying Victoria (Canada I presume?) and MPL specifying California. They are otherwise identical, but I think this is a material enough difference to justify NOSL being a unique license on the list.