Ritchey Permissive License v11

License: Ritchey Permissive License v11 (Exhibit A) Submitted: February 13, 2021, http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2021-February/005080.html Decision date: due no later than the first Board meeting after April 13, 2021 License Review Committee Recommendation: /Resolved that it is the opinion of the OSI that the Ritchey Permissive License v11 does not conform to the OSD and assure software freedom and the license is therefore not approved as an Open Source Initiative Certified license./ _Rationale Document_ No one but the license submitter was of the view that the license was suitable for approval. The license is poorly drafted and, as a result, there are several places where the license can be interpreted in different ways. The most heavily discussed license term was that permission is only granted for “lawful” purposes. To the extent that the statement means that the licensed content cannot be used for certain purposes because the activity may be unlawful, (which is the license drafter’s view, http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2021-February/005085.html) the restriction is a violation of OSD 6, “No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor.” Some commenters interpreted the reference to “lawful” as referring, not to extrinsic law, but to rights granted by the license. In this case, the phrase “permission to do anything lawful with the material which does not violate this license” cannot be construed. Because copyright is an exclusionary right, a statement of what use is permitted is a required element of a license. For example, distribution of a copyrighted work is not lawful unless permission has been granted, so if the license does not expressly state that distribution is allowed, distribution will not be “lawful.” Thus, the document might not be granting any rights at all. Another example of ambiguity is that the license drafter claims that the license is not a copyleft license; however, it is unclear whether the statement “The material must entirely remain solely under this license” refers also to derivative works of the licensed “material” or not. These ambiguities allow for interpretations that do not conform to the OSD and assure software freedom. _Exhibit A_ Subject to the terms of this license, any legal entity who receives material licensed under this license is granted royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive, permission to do anything lawful with the material which does not violate this license. Permissions are automatically revoked permanently from the legal entity upon breach of this license. The material is provided "as is", without implied fitness for any purpose. All obligations to the legal entity (including warranties, liabilities, representations, obligations, damages, and guarantees) are disclaimed by all parties involved (including the authors, rights holders, copyright holders, patent holders, and providers of the material). The legal entity is responsible for all consequences of sharing the material, and all obligations to recipients (including warranties, liabilities, representations, obligations, damages, and guarantees). The material must entirely remain solely under this license. This license is governed by the laws of the province of British Columbia (as they were on April 21, 2019), and the applicable laws of Canada (as they were on April 21, 2019). Any legal proceedings related to this license may only occur in the courts of British Columbia. The legal entity must be capable of being bound to this entire license, and agrees to be. If any portions of this license are unenforceable in applicable jurisdictions, this license cannot be accepted. The license text is provided under these terms.