The Open Software License (OSL)[2] is a software license created by Lawrence Rosen. The Open Source Initiative (OSI) has certified it as an open-source license, but the Debian project judged version 1.1[3][4] to be incompatible with the DFSG. The OSL is a copyleft license, with a termination clause triggered by filing a lawsuit alleging patent infringement.
Many people in the free software and open-source community feel that software patents are harmful to software, and are particularly harmful to open-source software.[5] The OSL attempts to counteract that by creating a pool of software which a user can use if that user does not harm it by attacking it with a patent lawsuit.
YouTube Encyclopedic
-
1/3Views:180 7257 03910 944
-
What is Open Source explained in LEGO
-
Software Licenses
-
What are open source softwares ? Open source / freeware (In Hindi)
Transcription
Hi, I'm Jonas Do you know what open source is? Well, let me explain it for you Basically, it means that the recipe, of any given work is shared and free for anybody to use Let me take you back where it all started In the 1880's A guy named Richard Stallmann had a problem with the software in his printer He could fix the printer himself But unfortunately, he was not allowed to get inside "the black box" by the manufacturer This frustration was the beginning of the Free and Open Source movements The essential benefits of Open Source are: Access to the source, or recipe, of any given work Free remix and redistribution of any given work An end to predatory vendor lock-in And a higher degree of cooperation Open Source is originally a software related term - but let's take a nontechnical example of where the open source mindset is actually used today Here's Dave He is a really passionate skateboarder He loves the community because everyone share tips and tricks, openly This means that everybody has access to the source of becoming a better skateboarder Dave has the opportunity of remixing an existing trick and making it even better He becomes more skilled, faster If Dave's skateboard breaks he doesn't necessarily have to go back to the vendor to get it fixed He can also fix it himself with the help of one of his friends from the community This is because the design of the skateboard is Open Source In the skateboard community you share new ideas and remix each others tricks You cooperate and reach much higher standards than any skateboarder could reach alone Now, let's take another example Here's Susan and Michael They have just bought a new property and now need a new house John is an Open Source architect and offers three designs that Susan and Michael can base their dream house on They choose option A, because it best fits their needs But Susan wants a conservatory as well so Michael draws one and adds that as an extension to their chosen house design - option A Susan and Michael choose Company A to help build the house It should be easy for Company A to build it because the architectural drawings and guidelines are already produced - by John the Open Source architect But during the process Susan and Michael find out that Company A's employees are very slow and not very polite They therefore get Company B to finish the work It's easy for Company B to take over the project because everything is openly documented Fortunately Company B does an amazing job of completing the construction project In the meantime Koko and Jun have shared a new solar cell design as an extension to option A as well Susan and Michael also decide to add that to their home Susan and Michael are now happy owners of a beautiful and customized new home But John is also happy He can now add two new extensions to his professional portfolio - without having done anything himself So now, I have given you a taste of some of the many benefits of Open Source But before I leave you I have to put an end to some of the myths that still exist First You have no control over your work That's not true As the initiator, John - the Open Source architect verifies extensions and chooses what can be added to his specific project and therefore also decides where the project is heading Second Open = Unsafe Not true In an Open Source project many people are involved and cooperate to make an even safer product and to keep unauthorized people out And third Everything is free No the source itself is free and publicly available but the house must, for example, still be built, customized, maintained and provided with water, power and heat Hopefully, you can now better understand the positive term; Open Source and the principles within Please, start opening up and use the extreme beneficial principles the way they deserve As mentioned, my name is Jonas and I'm representing BIT BLUEPRINT We have, in collaboration with Moving Monday, made this video to help scale the positive principles within the Open Source paradigm We have, of course, made this video free for everyone to use, modify and share - so feel free to do that Thanks for watching!
Key features
Patent action termination clause
The OSL has a termination clause intended to dissuade users from filing patent infringement lawsuits:
10) Termination for Patent Action. This License shall terminate automatically and You may no longer exercise any of the rights granted to You by this License as of the date You commence an action, including a cross-claim or counterclaim, against Licensor or any licensee alleging that the Original Work infringes a patent. This termination provision shall not apply for an action alleging patent infringement by combinations of the Original Work with other software or hardware.[6]
Warranty of provenance
Another goal of the OSL is to warrant provenance.[7]
7) Warranty of Provenance and Disclaimer of Warranty. Licensor warrants that the copyright in and to the Original Work and the patent rights granted herein by Licensor are owned by the Licensor or are sublicensed to You under the terms of this License with the permission of the contributor(s) of those copyrights and patent rights.[6]
Network deployment is distribution
OSL explicitly states that its provisions cover derivative works even when they are distributed only through online applications:
5) External Deployment. The term "External Deployment" means the use, distribution, or communication of the Original Work or Derivative Works in any way such that the Original Work or Derivative Works may be used by anyone other than You, whether those works are distributed or communicated to those persons or made available as an application intended for use over a network. As an express condition for the grants of license hereunder, You must treat any External Deployment by You of the Original Work or a Derivative Work as a distribution under section 1(c).[6]
Linking does not create a derivative work
OSL in section 1(a) authorizes licensees to reproduce covered software "as part of a collective work," as distinct from the Original Work or a Derivative Work. In section 1(c), only Derivate Works or copies of the Original Work are made subject to the license, not collective works. Derivative Work is defined in section 1(b) as being created when the licensee exercise their ability "to translate, adapt, alter, transform, modify, or arrange the Original Work."[6]
Rosen has written:[8]
The verbs used in § 1(b) ["translate, adapt, alter, transform, modify, or arrange"] reflect the kinds of activities that we generally do to create derivative literary or other expressive works, and those things—not functional linking—create Derivative Works as defined in this license. As a result, linking an unchanged Original Work with another independently-written work does not, absent more, create a Derivative Work subject to § 1(b); such an act is merely the incorporation of a copy of that Original Work into a collective work, authorized by § 1(a).
Comparison with the LGPL and GPL
The OSL is intended to be similar to the LGPL.[9] Note that the definition of Derivative Works in the OSL does not cover linking to OSL software/libraries so software that merely links to OSL software is not subject to the OSL license.
The OSL is not compatible with the GPL.[10] It has been claimed that the OSL is intended to be legally stronger than the GPL (with the main difference "making the software available for use over the Internet requires making the source code available"[11] that is the same goal as the even newer GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL), that is compatible with GPLv3),[11] however, unlike the GPL, the OSL has never been tested in court and is not widely used.
Assent to license
The restriction contained in Section 9 of the OSL reads:
If You distribute or communicate copies of the Original Work or a Derivative Work, You must make a reasonable effort under the circumstances to obtain the express assent of recipients to the terms of this License.[6]
In its analysis of the OSL the Free Software Foundation claims that "this requirement means that distributing OSL software on ordinary FTP sites, sending patches to ordinary mailing lists, or storing the software in an ordinary version control system, can arguably be a violation of the license and would subject violators to possible termination of the license. Thus, the OSL makes it challenging to develop software using the ordinary tools of Free Software development."[1]
Rosen contradicts this, stating in an explanation of his license that "most open source projects and commercial distributors already use appropriate procedures to obtain the manifest assent of their licensees, so this OSL 3.0 requirement is not intended to require something different than what now happens in ordinary software distribution practice."[12]
Distribution
If the FSF claim is true then the main difference between the GPL and OSL concerns possible restrictions on redistribution. Both licenses impose a kind of reciprocity condition requiring authors of extensions to the software to license those extensions with the respective license of the original work.
Patent action termination clause
The patent action termination clause, described above, is a further significant difference between the OSL and GPL.
Further provisions
- Derivative Works must be distributed under the same license. (§1c)
- Covered works that are distributed must be accompanied by the source code, or access to it made available. (§3)
- No restrictions on charging money for programs covered by the license, but source code must be included or made available for a reasonable fee. (§3)
- Covered works that are distributed must include a verbatim copy of the license. (§16)
- Distribution implies (but does not explicitly state) a royalty-free license for any patents embodied in the software. (§2)
Later versions
It is optional, though common for the copyright holder to add “or any later version” to the distribution terms in order to allow distribution under future versions of the license. This term is not directly mentioned in the OSL. However, it would seem to violate section 16, which requires a verbatim copy of the license.
Open software that uses the OSL
- ClearCanvas (sold), Enterprise-ready DICOM Viewer and RIS/PACS
- Magento, an eCommerce web application
- PrestaShop, an eCommerce web application
- Mulgara, a triplestore written in Java (new code is being contributed using the Apache 2.0 license.)
- The Graphical Models Toolkit (GMTK), a dynamic Bayesian network prototyping system
- Akeneo PIM (software), a Product Information Management application
Open software that used the OSL
- NUnitLite up to 2.0 Alpha, a lightweight version of NUnit, NUnitLite is available under MIT / X / Expat Licence
- CodeIgniter v3.0, an open source PHP framework (planned to use OSL, dropped because of GPL incompatibility for MIT License, may have used only for a short time for development release)
See also
- Academic Free License – similar, but not reciprocal license by the same author
- Open source license
- Software using the Open Software License (category)
References
- ^ a b c "Various Licenses and Comments about Them – GNU Project – Free Software Foundation (FSF)". Gnu.org. Retrieved March 4, 2012.
- ^ "Open Source Initiative OSI – The Open Software License 3.0 (OSL-3.0:Licensing | Open Source Initiative". Opensource.org. October 31, 2006. Retrieved March 4, 2012.
- ^ "DFSGLicenses – Debian Wiki". Wiki.debian.org. February 28, 2012. Retrieved March 4, 2012.
- ^ "Open Source Initiative OSI - The "Open Software License":Licensing". Opensource.org. May 1, 2006. Archived from the original on May 1, 2006. Retrieved October 15, 2012.
- ^ "BusinessWeek". February 6, 2006. Archived from the original on February 8, 2006. Retrieved March 4, 2012.
- ^ a b c d e "The Open Software License 3.0 (OSL-3.0)". opensource.org. Open Source Initiative. October 31, 2006. Retrieved April 21, 2021.
Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- ^ "LinuxElectrons - Apache Software Foundation Position Regarding Sender ID". Linuxelectrons.com. October 31, 2005. Archived from the original on October 31, 2005. Retrieved October 15, 2012.
- ^ "OSL 3.0 Explained". rosenlaw.com. Retrieved January 24, 2022.
- ^ "Open Software License ("OSL") v. 3.0" (PDF). Retrieved October 15, 2012.
- ^ "Philosophy of the GNU Project – GNU Project – Free Software Foundation (FSF)". Gnu.org. February 26, 2012. Retrieved March 4, 2012.
- ^ a b "Choosing an Open Source License". Airs.com. Retrieved March 4, 2012.
- ^ "OSL 3.0 Explained". rosenlaw.com. Retrieved December 12, 2023.
External links
- The Open Software License v.3.0
- The Universal Permissive License (UPL)
- The DFSG and Software Licenses
- Philosophy of the GNU Project by the Free Software Foundation.
This page was last edited on 20 December 2023, at 20:36