Hi Jilayne, hi team thank you for the information and the decision to include both of them. If I messed up the different versions I apologize for that. I thought it was consistent what I submitted.

Oliver and SPDX-Legal, Just wanted to point out that we had previously accepted the bzip2 license to be included on the next version of the SPDX License List (which is now soon to be released) and in

Hi All, The minutes are posted from today’s call: http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2014-06-26 big takeaway: we are shifting to focus on an interim (pre-2.0 spec) release of the SPDX

This event has been changed. more details » SPDX Legal Team Meeting Changed: Web Access (including connecting via Laptop, similar to Skype): http://uberconference.com/SPDXTeam Conference Number:

Hi All, Just a quick reminder that we have a legal team meeting in about 15 minutes :) Agenda: 1) update on 2.0 generally and various legal team tasks: - license expression syntax (Mark) - license

AGREED! * * * * * * * * * * * * Thomas H. Vidal, Esq. Abrams Garfinkel Margolis Bergson, LLP 5900 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2250 Los Angeles, CA 90036 Direct Dial: 310.300.2950 |

Hi Jilayne, Thank you, that's great to hear. Perhaps there is a bugtracker where these minor details can be reported? There's another noted today. The BSD 4 clause original page:

Tom Vidal twisted the bytes to say: Tom> Daniel: Tom> Thank you for your e-mail. Your comments are helpful. As to the Tom> listing of additional exceptions, my initial list had a notation that

We had a short-ish meeting today and mostly discussed what still needs to be done in preparation for 2.0 http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2014-06-12 Mark will be sending the draft of

Daniel: Thank you for your e-mail. Your comments are helpful. As to the listing of additional exceptions, my initial list had a notation that it was not exhaustive because I just kept finding more

Thanks Nuno, I think we have fixed this for the next version of the License List (which will be released later this summer, along with 2.0 of the spec), but this is a good reminder to check to make

Hi Legal Group, Sorry, but I am not able to attend today's legal group meeting. I added a worksheet to our Google Drive workbook to propose the Exception field definitions. Feel free to edit,

Dear legal team, There might be a typo on the license list in regards to Affero. Currently one reads: GNU Affero General Public License v1.0 GNU Affero General Public License v3.0 However, I'm

Oops. I should have said the LGPLv2.1 or the LGPLv3. So this is more like a (LGPL v2.1 OR LGPLv3) WITH (+ modified approved by the KDE Foundation) --dmg -- --dmg --- Daniel M.

Hi Tom, some comments: what is called the openVPN exception should perhaps be made more generic. It has been used by several GPL-ed programs to be able to link to openSSL. I think it is important

On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:38 AM, J Lovejoy <opensource@...> wrote: Thus, by having the “+” as an operator, one could, theoretically, apply it to *any* license on the SPDX License List (I

Dear all (I put in bcc the FSE legal network and some ALU people) This is an information mail that is connected on the topics in discussion with SPDX group and might be of interest to FSFE

Thanks, Scott. Sorry, again, all for missing the call. * * * * * * * * * * * * Thomas H. Vidal, Esq. Abrams Garfinkel Margolis Bergson, LLP 5900 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2250 Los Angeles, CA

Great call today folks! Minutes are posted. We are trucking along towards 2.0!! http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2014-05-29 Paul and Jilayne SPDX Legal Team co-leads

Sorry, everyone. I have a mediation today and am out-of-pocket. Have a great call. * * * * * * * * * * * * Thomas H. Vidal, Esq. Abrams Garfinkel Margolis Bergson, LLP 5900 Wilshire Boulevard,