Position Paper 20070207

OGB Position Paper Feb 07, 2007

 CAB/OGB Position Paper # 20070207 version 0.6

Topic Should OpenSolaris be dual licensed via CDDL and GPLv3

 Published by: OpenSolaris CAB/OGB current members: Casper Dik, Al Hopper, Roy Fielding, Simon Phipps, Rich Teer

Background Over the past week or so a heated and passionate debate has taken place on the opensolaris-discuss mailing list [1] relating to the possibility of dual-licensing OpenSolaris, and in particular with GPLv3 as the 2nd license, in addition to CDDL, under which OpenSolaris is currently licensed. The CAB/OGB (henceforth referred to as simply the OGB) has observed this discussion carefully and individual OGB members have been active participants.

 Now that this discussion is winding down, the OGB, as the elected representatives of the OpenSolaris project, will render an OGB statement of position and provide guidance to the community to bring closure to this discussion and to determine the communities near term future licensing direction.

 Discussion summaries (the pros and the cons):

 The Pro-dual licensing community members assert that dual licensing will:

• increase developer mindshare
• attract active developers currently working on other FOSS projects
• promote code exchange across FOSS boundries
• end the constant anti-CDDL campaign waged by GPL* license proponents

 The Anti-dual licensing community members assert that dual licensing will:

• increase licensing complexity and futher complicate this already legally complex licensing landscape
• lead to endless continued debates related to various "what if" code inclusion/exclusion scenarios
• allow a one-way code fork by acquiring the OpenSolaris body of code, manipulating, removing or modifying the (eventual, but currently unknown) GPLv3 license terms in a way that prevents or impedes the changes being propagated back to OpenSolaris.
• not entice or attract GPL* proponent FOSS developers, who want to ensure that other Operating Systems (they actively work on) flourish, to OpenSolaris.

 The OGB, having heard arguments from both sides, concludes:

• Discussing GPLv3 is pre-mature as the license does not exist at this time.
• That there is little, if any, benefit to dual-licensing OpenSolaris with CDDL and the yet to be approved/upcoming GPLv3 license - aside from possible short term good press for the project.
• There are significant downsides to dual licensing, including, but not limited to, license complexity, confusion and the possibility of long term bad press from any exception language that such a license would inevitably require.
• GPL* licensing OpenSolaris would be yielding to a small vocal minority of FOSS developers who use the lack of GPL licensing, purely as a means of fostering FUD towards OpenSolaris and who will, in all likelyhood, find some other workable mechanism to continue to foster FUD towards the project.
• There are higher priority action items to be completed in order to build developer mindshare and that this opinion is held by a large number of current contributors and acts as a barrier to other potential contributors.

 The OGB having carefully weighed the available options concludes and decrees that:

• any option related to GPLv3 dual licensing be re-assessed no sooner than 6 months after the GPLv3 has been published and approved.
• Further discussions related to any form of dual licensing be postponed until after the GPLv3 has been published and approved and should take place on the OGB discussion forum only.
• Further discussion on GPL* is merely a diversion and distraction that should be discouraged, so as to allow the community to concentrate on the higher priority action items - especially those that will improve developer mindshare.

 -

 MOTION To adopt the CAB/OGB Position Paper # 20070207 version 0.6 (proposed) by Al Hopper seconded by Rich Teer. Motion carried unanimously (In favor: Rich Teer, Casper Dik, Row Fielding, Al Hopper. Absent Simon Phipps).

[1]  begin here - it will take approximately 5 hours to read all the related threads: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2007-January/023879.html