New License/Exception Request
Thank you for your proposal for a generic SPDX license to denote proprietary licenses. The SPDX-Legal team has considered your request and reviewed the examples you provided from npm along with other examples we separately researched. After discussion, we have concluded that including such a license on the list does not comply with the purpose or role of SPDX or the SPDX License List, for the following reasons:
• SPDX seeks to simply organize and communicate information, not make legal conclusions. Any legal judgments required when dealing with open source, including identifying whether a license is proprietary, are necessarily left to individual users and their legal counsel.
• Having a generic identifier with no corresponding license text to match to places the burden on the SPDX user to make a legal interpretation to determine whether the software license is proprietary. The goal of the SPDX License List is to avoid such interpretations, but to provide a list of vetted short identifiers and license text than can be definitively matched, whether by using the efficiency of automated processes (i.e. scanning tools, etc.) or human eyes. While we noted you provided an example license text with your proposal, we understand that to be an illustration. In practice, a proprietary identifier would encompass an unknown and potentially unlimited number of potential license text.
Alan D. Tse
From: rex f <aug2uag@...>
Subject: New License/Exception Request
Date: March 10, 2016 at 2:22:37 AM PST
Please refer to the attached proposal.pdf and thank you for your consideration.
Reza (Ray/Rex) Fatahi, PhD
|1 - 1 of 1|