Re: "Scope" of licenses to be covered by SPDX

Philip Odence

Polite request:
Could we shift this discussion off of the General Meeting list and onto the Legal Team list only? TThis is GREAT discussion for the legal team.
This is not a big problem, but I want to respect the norms we established when we formed the Legal, Business and Tech teams. Part of splitting up the lists was to keep the traffic on the General Meeting list light so as not to burden folks who are only looking to monitor goings across the teams and at a high level. Real work (and this is real work) is supposed to be done on the team lists. 
So, if anyone responds to this (or other emails in the thread) please remove spdx@... from the CC.
Note: anyone not on the legal list and wanting to follow the discussion can sign up at

From: Tom Incorvia <tom.incorvia@...>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 14:14:32 -0500
To: Bob Gobeille <bob.gobeille@...>, "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@...>
Cc: SPDX-legal <spdx-legal@...>, <spdx@...>
Subject: RE: "Scope" of licenses to be covered by SPDX

As long as the licenses are


-          Carefully named and vetted for exact license text


-          Somewhat broadly applicable (“somewhat broadly” is fuzzy, but we do want the list to grow starting with very common and moving to less common – it is a way to get more value with our limited bandwidth to vet the licenses)


Then more is better.


SPDX is looking for volunteers to submit additional licenses that meet the above criteria.


To nominate a license, provide this info:


Legal team: I can help with the reviews of proposed licenses, although I am not available until the end of July. 




Tom Incorvia


Direct: (512) 340-1336



-----Original Message-----
From: spdx-legal-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-legal-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Bob Gobeille
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:50 PM
To: Bradley M. Kuhn
Cc: SPDX-legal; spdx@...
Subject: Re: "Scope" of licenses to be covered by SPDX


On Jun 28, 2012, at 12:02 PM, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:


> But, note that exceptions are all over the place, in things like

> Classpath, autoconf, and plenty of other places.  I wonder: has anyone

> taken a Fossology (the best scanning tool available as Free Software)

> run of Debian distribution and just made sure every license it finds

> has a moniker in SPDX?  If not, why not?  Seems like a necessary first

> step for SPDX to have any chance of being complete.


FWIW, one of our FOSSology contributors (thank you Camille) put together a spreadsheet (HarmonisationLicenseIDs.ods)  highlighting the differences between the fossology license list and the SPDX license list:


We plan on using this to update fossology with the SPDX license short names and insure we have license signatures for all the SPDX licenses.


Bob Gobeille



Spdx-legal mailing list



This message has been scanned by MailController -

This message has been scanned by MailController.


_______________________________________________ Spdx mailing list Spdx@...

Join to automatically receive all group messages.