Subject: RE: License Discussion for the Broad Institute Public License (BIPL)
From: "Wilson, Andrew" <andrew.wilson@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 15:08:45 -0700

 Thu, 11 May 2006 15:08:45 -0700
McCoy Smith wrote:

> Was there not a discussion several months ago expressing concerns
and/or
> objections to a proposed open source license having certain
> non-reciprocal obligations?

> This one would seem to have the same problem.

Indeed.  You're thinking of the OVPL.  This list probably saw
more traffic on OVPL than any other license, at least in the last
few years.  OSI eventually decided not to certify OVPL on the
grounds that it was non-reciprocal (the ID got an automatic license
back equivalent to assignment of copyright from contributors). 

Andy Wilson
Intel Open Source Technology Center