The problem is that except for licenses like GPL or Apache2 a lot of licenses MIT, BSD, Apache1.1 contain a part which is different from one license to another (such as the copyright and for old BSD t

Phil and all, I know the SPDX mailing list is not the best mailing list to do this request but I would like to launch a new initiative on FOSS governance standardisation, can someone tell me what is t

Dear all As you probably noticed Alcatel-Lucent is trying to implement the SPDX standard. We have an internal database on FOSS IP issues that has been created in 2002. and we are trying to implement a

No ALU has a DB with 5000 entries for open source maintained since 2002 describing IPR issues. Since 2007 we are requesting from all our suppliers the list of FOSS coming with their products with lice

Gary, I think in my previous mail I expressed our use case: 1) getting information from our suppliers on FOSS included in their products in order to respect license obligations and to provide this to

So far our FOSS clauses are not aligned on the SPDX standard (we are already happy when suppliers can comply to our requirements without too much discussion so we did not formalize things too much) Wh

Well, today we solve more or less this issue by requesting the URL where the FOSs can be downloaded, so URL + name + version number determine the FOSS used. It is not perfect but I never manage a good

You are right it is FTFE legal network. If I provided our FOSS clause to SPDX it was illustrate the use case, I know that the discussion on this subject should be in FTFE mailing list. By the way with

So Bradley, what is your suggestion for me to try to standardize these FOSS clauses. What organization? I have tried SPDX, I have been advised to go to FSFE legal network. I have join the FSFE legal n

Dear all, once again on a different topic within our current effort in implementing the SPDX standard. Here it is a licensing issue. I am not very comfortable with the licensing issue for the data whe

First I Would like enlighten that when I speak on the SPDX or FSFE mailing list I speak for the Alcatel-Lucent company; I check before with our FOSS executive committee that I can say things (in most

I need to think a little bit about it with our lawyers on the potential consequences before answering you. What I want is freedom, to exchange information between companies without constraints. If we

It is not a definite answer, but discussing with our people implementing the spec (marc-Etienne in cc)it seems that the checksums would be usefull to compare package between companies, but I do not se

Thank you very much for your quick answer and suggestions. My goal is not only to standardize the legal text of our FOSS clauses. It is also to 1) raise awareness about being able to provide the list

For the definition of FOSS (free and/or open source software (free is for free of cost here)) that we provide it is of course in the context of a contract negotiation. It is everything that do not go

As you say (I like the expression) my concern about this license is more like getting an eye brow raised; What does this license implies? If I want to export data from our DB, I will not make it publi

Before answering this, we need to determine in which group/mailing list we need to discuss this subject, I do not want to bother people not interested by this. Can we continue with SPDX list should we

I agree for this particular topic (but it seems I am not part of this mailing list). But I am more ambitious, I have other initiatives in the pockets: having an open source DB describing the foss IP i

Michael, for me it is not a subject of discussion I am discussing with third party companies since 10 years on the subject and if you ignore open-source like license or “free proprietary” license, the

We do not discuss or put into question the FSF and OSI definitions of FOSS (I know them by heart, I understand the philosophy behind them and respect them). We try to make a definition of what should