├── BSD-2-CLAUSE ├── CONTRIBUTING.md ├── PUBLIC-PUBLIC-LICENSE ├── PUBLIC-PUBLIC-LICENSE-LICENSE └── README.md /BSD-2-CLAUSE: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | Copyright (c) All rights reserved. 2 | 3 | Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without 4 | modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are 5 | met: 6 | 7 | 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright 8 | notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 9 | 10 | 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright 11 | notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the 12 | documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 13 | 14 | THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS 15 | "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT 16 | LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR 17 | A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT 18 | HOLDERS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, 19 | SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED 20 | TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR 21 | PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF 22 | LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING 23 | NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS 24 | SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. 25 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /CONTRIBUTING.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | Please format `LICENSE` with `par -w72 -s0 -p0`. 2 | 3 | If that makes no sense to you, don't worry about it. 4 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /PUBLIC-PUBLIC-LICENSE: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | The Public Public License 2 | Development Draft 3 | 4 | Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without 5 | modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are 6 | met: 7 | 8 | Legal entities, but not natural persons, that would exercise this 9 | permission must propose a dated change to this file identifying 10 | themselves by legal name, form, jurisdiction, and a contact e-mail 11 | address to those publicly maintaining this software. The change will be 12 | published with this software. This condition is waived if no means of 13 | proposing the change, free of charge via the Internet, can be readily 14 | ascertained by one reasonably skilled in software development at the 15 | time the entity begins exercising this permission. 16 | 17 | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 18 | 19 | This software is provided by the copyright holders and contributors 20 | "as is" and any express or implied warranties, including, but not 21 | limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for 22 | a particular purpose are disclaimed. In no event shall the copyright 23 | holders or contributors be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, 24 | special, exemplary, or consequential damages (including, but not limited 25 | to, procurement of substitute goods or services; loss of use, data, or 26 | profits; or business interruption) however caused and on any theory of 27 | liability, whether in contract, strict liability, or tort (including 28 | negligence or otherwise) arising in any way out of the use of this 29 | software, even if advised of the possibility of such damage. 30 | 31 | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 32 | 33 | [Example, Inc.; Delaware corporation; oss@example.com; 2016-01-01] 34 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /PUBLIC-PUBLIC-LICENSE-LICENSE: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | Redistribution and use of The Public Public License (the "PPL"), with or 2 | without modification, are permitted provided that partial and modified 3 | copies of the PPL may not be called "The Public Public License". 4 | 5 | The PPL is not legal advice, and its authors do not become your 6 | attorneys or professionally responsible to you because of what the PPL 7 | or any related materials say. The fact that someone has contributed to 8 | the PPL does not mean that they are a lawyer or specialized in any kind 9 | of law or legal practice. 10 | 11 | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 12 | 13 | The PPL is provided by the copyright holders and contributors "as is" 14 | and any express or implied warranties, including, but not limited to, 15 | the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular 16 | purpose are disclaimed. In no event shall the copyright holders or 17 | contributors be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special, 18 | exemplary, or consequential damages (including, but not limited to, 19 | procurement of substitute goods or services; loss of use, data, or 20 | profits; or business interruption) however caused and on any theory of 21 | liability, whether in contract, strict liability, or tort (including 22 | negligence or otherwise) arising in any way out of the use of the PPL, 23 | even if advised of the possibility of such damage. 24 | 25 | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 26 | 27 | /s/ Kyle E. Mitchell 28 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /README.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | ***Warning! Experimental legal technology.*** 2 | 3 | Software licenses are prescription-strength legal devices. 4 | 5 | If you need to choose a license, don’t be an idiot. Hire a lawyer. 6 | 7 | A good one will know whether the Public Public License fits your need. 8 | 9 | ## Whatsit? 10 | 11 | A "fork" of [The Two-Clause BSD License], with two changes: 12 | 13 | 1. No more "attribution" requirement to provide copies of a copyright 14 | notice or the license itself. 15 | 16 | 2. Corporations and other kinds of legal entities, but not individuals, 17 | have to propose patches to add themselves to a list below the license 18 | terms in order to exercise their permission for the software. 19 | 20 | [The Two-Clause BSD License]: https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause 21 | 22 | In other words: The FreeBSD license, less paperwork, with a built-in 23 | life preserver for open source maintainers. 24 | 25 | ## Whysit? 26 | 27 | Two reasons: 28 | 29 | 1. In many kinds of development, the attribution (notice and terms) 30 | requirement is largely ignored. For example, few front-end 31 | applications preserve license header comments in the blobs of 32 | JavaScript sent to users' web browser or concatenate `LICENSE` files, 33 | `NOTICE` files, or metadata in any publicly visible place. Whether 34 | early or late in a project's arc, developers would rather save each 35 | other the attribution chore. 36 | 37 | 2. Open source projects are collaborative efforts, and developers are 38 | often far more concerned about getting proper credit for their 39 | project than for themselves individually. In addition, once a 40 | project reaches a critical mass, it's often difficult to contact, 41 | or even identify, the downstream users who could and would support 42 | maintainers as the burden and benefit of their ongoing work grow. 43 | 44 | ## Is it "open source"? 45 | 46 | Good question. [I] don't think so. More concretely, [I] don't think 47 | [The Open Source Initiative] would approve the Public Public License as 48 | an "open source" license according to [their read of the Open Source 49 | Definition][Annotated OSD]. 50 | 51 | [I]: https://kemitchell.com 52 | 53 | [The Open Source Initiative]: https://opensource.org 54 | 55 | [Annotated OSD]: https://opensource.org/osd-annotated 56 | 57 | Consider: 58 | 59 | > > 5\. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups 60 | > > 61 | > > The license must not discriminate against any person or group of 62 | > > persons. 63 | > 64 | > Rationale: In order to get the maximum benefit from the process, the 65 | > maximum diversity of persons and groups should be equally eligible 66 | > to contribute to open sources. Therefore we forbid any open-source 67 | > license from locking anybody out of the process. 68 | 69 | The Public Public License doesn't deny any particular kind of licensee 70 | the ability to get a license. Neither does it "lock anybody out", 71 | in the sense of preventing them from making changes. But it does 72 | discriminate between individuals or "natural persons", on the one 73 | hand, and legally recognized groups of individuals, like corporations, 74 | coops, partnerships, &c. Only the latter have to identify themselves to 75 | exercise the permission given by the license. 76 | 77 | > > 6\. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor 78 | > > 79 | > > The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program 80 | > > in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict 81 | > > the program from being used in a business, or from being used for 82 | > > genetic research. 83 | > 84 | > Rationale: The major intention of this clause is to prohibit license 85 | > traps that prevent open source from being used commercially. We want 86 | > commercial users to join our community, not feel excluded from it. 87 | 88 | The Public Public License discriminates in a minor way among legal forms 89 | of licensees. It's probably safe to assume, at least in the United 90 | States, that being organized into some kind of legal entity is highly 91 | correlated with business or commercial purpose. But The Public Public 92 | License's self-identification requirement was written to apply equally 93 | to tax-exempt or "not-for-profit" entities, or even government entities. 94 | Conversely, an individual needn't self-identify, even if their use of 95 | the software is entirely profit-seeking. 96 | 97 | > > 7\. Distribution of License 98 | > > 99 | > > The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the 100 | > > program is redistributed without the need for execution of an 101 | > > additional license by those parties. 102 | > 103 | > Rationale: This clause is intended to forbid closing up software by 104 | > indirect means such as requiring a non-disclosure agreement. 105 | 106 | To be honest, [I] never really understood this criterion. 107 | 108 | The Public Public License does impose an additional step on some 109 | licensees, but that step does not give licensors any kind of veto or 110 | stalling power on anyone's rights. The self-identification requirement 111 | was written to be fully satisfied by merely proposing a change to the 112 | list of licensees. As soon as the proposal is made, whether maintainers 113 | ever adopt it or not, the condition is satisfied. 114 | 115 | As an escape hatch, the self-identification requirement applies only 116 | when someone "reasonably skilled in software development" can "readily 117 | ascertain\[\]" how to propose for free on the 'Net. If the project is 118 | orphaned, the self-identification requirement drops out. 119 | 120 | > > 10\. License Must Be Technology-Neutral 121 | > > 122 | > > No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual 123 | > > technology or style of interface. 124 | > 125 | > Rationale: This provision is aimed specifically at licenses which 126 | > require an explicit gesture of assent in order to establish a contract 127 | > between licensor and licensee. Provisions mandating so-called 128 | > "click-wrap" may conflict with important methods of software 129 | > distribution such as FTP download, CD-ROM anthologies, and web 130 | > mirroring; such provisions may also hinder code re-use. Conformant 131 | > licenses must allow for the possibility that (a) redistribution of the 132 | > software will take place over non-Web channels that do not support 133 | > click-wrapping of the download, and that (b) the covered code (or 134 | > re-used portions of covered code) may run in a non-GUI environment 135 | > that cannot support popup dialogues. 136 | 137 | Read as broadly as possible, the attribution requirements of all the 138 | most common open source licenses violate this criterion. At the other 139 | extreme, the OSI's comments focus very specifically on click-wrap, a 140 | classic problem dealing with when contracts are formed, rather than 141 | satisfying conditions of a license. 142 | 143 | [I] don't represent the OSI in any way, but it's my general "feeling" 144 | that the "spirit" of this criterion is really about friction. If 145 | you have to do anything with open source software above and beyond 146 | determining that: 147 | 148 | 1. it's licensed on open source terms 149 | 2. those giving the license have the right to do so 150 | 151 | then it doesn't "feel" like "open source". 152 | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------