Similar discussion list but not only for Europe?

"Andrés G. Aragoneses" aaragoneses at
Sat Mar 7 02:54:06 UTC 2009

Ben Finney wrote:
> "Andrés G. Aragoneses" <aaragoneses at> writes:
>> I think it makes more sense for them to embrace a common license,
>> and much better if it's blessed by the FSF, instead of each one
>> adopting a very similar one.
> Well, I'm not going to tell anyone not to discuss or ask questions.
> But I think your chances of getting a new license “blessed by the FSF”
> are vanishingly small.
> These companies that want license terms already had the opportunity to
> get a blessed-by-the-FSF license: the GPLv3, which was the result of
> unprecedented input and discussion from the entire software community.
> I would expect you will have better results encouraging companies to
> use those well-understood license terms.

If I'm pushing the creation of a new license, it's logical to think that
I've already examined the needs of these companies, and the existing
licenses don't fit in their corresponding distribution scenarios, even
if they're really desiring to switch and start using open source licenses.

(And IMO if the FSF was so close minded to not examine these special
cases, licenses such as the AGPL or LGPL would have never been created.)

So, should I start in this mailing-list the discussion and elaborate on
the motivations of why this new license is needed and why the existing
licenses do not fit with this model? Or should I contact other FSF staff
via other means? Any FSF member reading?



Andrés G. Aragoneses
Software Engineer
aaragoneses at

Novell, Inc.
Software for the open enterprise

More information about the Discussion mailing list