For Approval: Microsoft Community License

[Jon Rosenberg (PBM)]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Microsoft is pleased to submit the Microsoft Community License to the OSI for consideration as an OSI approved license.  Microsoft believes that this license provides unique value to the open source community by delivering simplicity, brevity, and clearly delineated reciprocal terms.

The three sections below provide the information required for the discussion portion of the approval process.  We look forward to working with the OSI on this submission process and discussing this submission with the open source community. 

Jon Rosenberg

Director, Source Program

Microsoft Corporation

 

----------------------------------

 

Section  I:  Which OSI licenses are similar and why won’t one of those do instead?

Although one can assess similarity of license terms in numerous ways, the MS-CL has some similarities to the Mozilla Public License (V1.1).  However, we sought to draft a license that is simple, short, and easy-to-understand.  In particular, the Mozilla Public License’s definitions of original code, covered code, and modifications can be difficult to apply in practice, given the many ways in which software can be distributed and linked together.  The MS-CL provides a clear objective test of whether or not a derivative work constitutes a modification of the original code. 

Section II: Compatibilities and incompatibilities with other OSI licenses:  Source code distribution breaks down into two areas: Relicensing of MS-CL code and redistribution of MS-CL code with other code that is licensed under a different license.

·         Can MS-CL code be redistributed under a different license?

 No.  The license states that “If you distribute any portion of the software in source code form, you may do so only under this license… ”  This restriction is similar to the restriction in the Mozilla Public License that states “You may not offer or impose any terms on any Source Code version that alters or restricts the applicable version of this License or the recipients' rights hereunder.”  The license explicitly prohibits relicensing of the original licensed code under a different license, in whole, in part or as part of a different piece of software. 

·         Can MS-CL code be redistributed in combination with other code that is licensed under a different license?

As long as any files containing the original MS-CL licensed code are redistributed under the MS-CL license, then the MS-CL  places no restrictions on combining MS-CL code with other code that is licensed under  another license.  Any files containing any of the MS-CL licensed code must be distributed only under the MS-CL license and not under any other license.  Licenses that prohibit the distribution of code under any terms other than the terms of that license will not be compatible with the MS-CL.

Section III: The License:  A copy of the license is included below and also provided as a .txt file attachment.

Microsoft Community License (Ms-CL)

 

This license governs use of the accompanying software. If you use the software, you accept this

license. If you do not accept the license, do not use the software.

 

1. Definitions

The terms "reproduce," "reproduction," "derivative works," and "distribution" have the same meaning here

as under U.S. copyright law.

A "contribution" is the original software, or any additions or changes to the software.

A "contributor" is any person that distributes its contribution under this license.

 "Licensed patents" are a contributor's patent claims that read directly on its contribution.

 

2. Grant of Rights

(A) Copyright Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in

section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright license to

reproduce its contribution, prepare derivative works of its contribution, and distribute its contribution or any

derivative works that you create.

(B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in

section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licensed

patents to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and/or otherwise dispose of its contribution in

the software or derivative works of the contribution in the software.

 

3. Conditions and Limitations

(A) Reciprocal Grants- For any file you distribute that contains code from the software (in source code or

binary format), you must provide recipients the source code to that file along with a copy of this license,

which license will govern that file. You may license other files that are entirely your own work and do not

contain code from the software under any terms you choose.

(B) No Trademark License- This license does not grant you rights to use any contributors' name, logo, or

trademarks.

(C) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the

software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically.

(D) If you distribute any portion of the software, you must retain all copyright, patent, trademark, and

attribution notices that are present in the software.

(E) If you distribute any portion of the software in source code form, you may do so only under this license

by including a complete copy of this license with your distribution. If you distribute any portion of the

software in compiled or object code form, you may only do so under a license that complies with this

license.

(F) The software is licensed "as-is." You bear the risk of using it. The contributors give no express

warranties, guarantees or conditions. You may have additional consumer rights under your local laws which

this license cannot change. To the extent permitted under your local laws, the contributors exclude the

implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement.

 

 

 

 

 

Microsoft Community License (Ms-CL)

This license governs use of the accompanying software. If you use the software, you accept this
license. If you do not accept the license, do not use the software.

1. Definitions
The terms "reproduce," "reproduction," "derivative works," and "distribution" have the same meaning here
as under U.S. copyright law.
A "contribution" is the original software, or any additions or changes to the software.
A "contributor" is any person that distributes its contribution under this license.
 "Licensed patents" are a contributor's patent claims that read directly on its contribution.

2. Grant of Rights
(A) Copyright Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in
section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright license to
reproduce its contribution, prepare derivative works of its contribution, and distribute its contribution or any
derivative works that you create.
(B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in
section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licensed
patents to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and/or otherwise dispose of its contribution in
the software or derivative works of the contribution in the software.

3. Conditions and Limitations
(A) Reciprocal Grants- For any file you distribute that contains code from the software (in source code or
binary format), you must provide recipients the source code to that file along with a copy of this license,
which license will govern that file. You may license other files that are entirely your own work and do not
contain code from the software under any terms you choose.
(B) No Trademark License- This license does not grant you rights to use any contributors' name, logo, or
trademarks.
(C) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the
software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically.
(D) If you distribute any portion of the software, you must retain all copyright, patent, trademark, and
attribution notices that are present in the software.
(E) If you distribute any portion of the software in source code form, you may do so only under this license
by including a complete copy of this license with your distribution. If you distribute any portion of the
software in compiled or object code form, you may only do so under a license that complies with this
license.
(F) The software is licensed "as-is." You bear the risk of using it. The contributors give no express
warranties, guarantees or conditions. You may have additional consumer rights under your local laws which
this license cannot change. To the extent permitted under your local laws, the contributors exclude the
implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement.

[Chuck Swiger]

Hi--

On Aug 10, 2007, at 9:16 AM, Jon Rosenberg (PBM) wrote:
> Microsoft is pleased to submit the Microsoft Community License to  
> the OSI for consideration as an OSI approved license.  Microsoft  
> believes that this license provides unique value to the open source  
> community by delivering simplicity, brevity, and clearly delineated  
> reciprocal terms.

Except for the addition of clause 3(a) containing a "weak" copyleft  
provision, this MSCL seems to be word-for-word identical with the  
MSPL.  The effect of 3(a) requires that changes to code under the  
MSCL must be made available in source code form whenever that code is  
redistributed as a binary, but does not require that other sources be  
released or that it be convenient (or possible) for a user to replace  
the source code in an existing binary with a changed version.

Thus, I think that the LGPL would be a better choice as far as end-
users are concerned, but, to the extent that an author might want to  
make their software freely available but at least be able to see what  
changes, improvements, or bugfixes someone has made if they use it in  
their own binaries, this license provides that effect without  
imposing obligations on completely separate source code which might  
be used in combination with the MSCL-licensed software.

As with the MSPL, the MSCL seems to be fully compliant with the OSD.

+1.

--
-Chuck

[Lawrence Rosen]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Jon, I have a question about the following provision:

 

(A) Reciprocal Grants- For any file you distribute that contains code from the software (in source code or

binary format), you must provide recipients the source code to that file along with a copy of this license,

which license will govern that file. You may license other files that are entirely your own work and do not

contain code from the software under any terms you choose.

 

When software under multiple licenses is combined into one .zip or .tar file, must that entire file be under the MS-CL? File-based software licenses are subject to confusion on that point. Not that this would affect its compliance with OSD at all, it just possibly turns a reasonable reciprocity requirement into a very dangerous one. Other licenses deal with this in better ways, at least from the vantage point of distributors who do lots of combining of software into single-file downloads or distributions.

 

Congratulations on submitting a license for approval. I am please to see Microsoft join this loud party. Take it from an experienced license submitter, you'll be bruised but the bruises heal. :-)

 

/Larry

 

Lawrence Rosen

Rosenlaw & Einschlag, a technology law firm (www.rosenlaw.com)

3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482

707-485-1242 * cell: 707-478-8932 * fax: [phone]

Skype: LawrenceRosen

Author of "Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom and

                Intellectual Property Law" (Prentice Hall 2004)

---

From: Jon Rosenberg (PBM) [mailto:jonr@...]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 9:17 AM
To: license-discuss@...
Cc: Jon Rosenberg (PBM)
Subject: For Approval: Microsoft Community License

 

Microsoft is pleased to submit the Microsoft Community License to the OSI for consideration as an OSI approved license.  Microsoft believes that this license provides unique value to the open source community by delivering simplicity, brevity, and clearly delineated reciprocal terms.

The three sections below provide the information required for the discussion portion of the approval process.  We look forward to working with the OSI on this submission process and discussing this submission with the open source community. 

Jon Rosenberg

Director, Source Program

Microsoft Corporation

 

----------------------------------

 

Section  I:  Which OSI licenses are similar and why won’t one of those do instead?

Although one can assess similarity of license terms in numerous ways, the MS-CL has some similarities to the Mozilla Public License (V1.1).  However, we sought to draft a license that is simple, short, and easy-to-understand.  In particular, the Mozilla Public License’s definitions of original code, covered code, and modifications can be difficult to apply in practice, given the many ways in which software can be distributed and linked together.  The MS-CL provides a clear objective test of whether or not a derivative work constitutes a modification of the original code. 

Section II: Compatibilities and incompatibilities with other OSI licenses:  Source code distribution breaks down into two areas: Relicensing of MS-CL code and redistribution of MS-CL code with other code that is licensed under a different license.

·     Can MS-CL code be redistributed under a different license?

 No.  The license states that “If you distribute any portion of the software in source code form, you may do so only under this license… ”  This restriction is similar to the restriction in the Mozilla Public License that states “You may not offer or impose any terms on any Source Code version that alters or restricts the applicable version of this License or the recipients' rights hereunder.”  The license explicitly prohibits relicensing of the original licensed code under a different license, in whole, in part or as part of a different piece of software. 

·     Can MS-CL code be redistributed in combination with other code that is licensed under a different license?

As long as any files containing the original MS-CL licensed code are redistributed under the MS-CL license, then the MS-CL  places no restrictions on combining MS-CL code with other code that is licensed under  another license.  Any files containing any of the MS-CL licensed code must be distributed only under the MS-CL license and not under any other license.  Licenses that prohibit the distribution of code under any terms other than the terms of that license will not be compatible with the MS-CL.

Section III: The License:  A copy of the license is included below and also provided as a .txt file attachment.

Microsoft Community License (Ms-CL)

 

This license governs use of the accompanying software. If you use the software, you accept this

license. If you do not accept the license, do not use the software.

 

1. Definitions

The terms "reproduce," "reproduction," "derivative works," and "distribution" have the same meaning here

as under U.S. copyright law.

A "contribution" is the original software, or any additions or changes to the software.

A "contributor" is any person that distributes its contribution under this license.

 "Licensed patents" are a contributor's patent claims that read directly on its contribution.

 

2. Grant of Rights

(A) Copyright Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in

section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright license to

reproduce its contribution, prepare derivative works of its contribution, and distribute its contribution or any

derivative works that you create.

(B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in

section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licensed

patents to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and/or otherwise dispose of its contribution in

the software or derivative works of the contribution in the software.

 

3. Conditions and Limitations

(A) Reciprocal Grants- For any file you distribute that contains code from the software (in source code or

binary format), you must provide recipients the source code to that file along with a copy of this license,

which license will govern that file. You may license other files that are entirely your own work and do not

contain code from the software under any terms you choose.

(B) No Trademark License- This license does not grant you rights to use any contributors' name, logo, or

trademarks.

(C) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the

software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically.

(D) If you distribute any portion of the software, you must retain all copyright, patent, trademark, and

attribution notices that are present in the software.

(E) If you distribute any portion of the software in source code form, you may do so only under this license

by including a complete copy of this license with your distribution. If you distribute any portion of the

software in compiled or object code form, you may only do so under a license that complies with this

license.

(F) The software is licensed "as-is." You bear the risk of using it. The contributors give no express

warranties, guarantees or conditions. You may have additional consumer rights under your local laws which

this license cannot change. To the extent permitted under your local laws, the contributors exclude the

implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement.

 

 

 

 

 

[Jon Rosenberg (PBM)]

You are correct.  The MS-CL simply adds one clause to the MS-PL.

-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Swiger [mailto:chuck@...]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 11:15 AM
To: Jon Rosenberg (PBM)
Cc: license-discuss@...
Subject: Re: For Approval: Microsoft Community License

Hi--

On Aug 10, 2007, at 9:16 AM, Jon Rosenberg (PBM) wrote:
> Microsoft is pleased to submit the Microsoft Community License to
> the OSI for consideration as an OSI approved license.  Microsoft
> believes that this license provides unique value to the open source
> community by delivering simplicity, brevity, and clearly delineated
> reciprocal terms.

Except for the addition of clause 3(a) containing a "weak" copyleft
provision, this MSCL seems to be word-for-word identical with the
MSPL.  The effect of 3(a) requires that changes to code under the
MSCL must be made available in source code form whenever that code is
redistributed as a binary, but does not require that other sources be
released or that it be convenient (or possible) for a user to replace
the source code in an existing binary with a changed version.

Thus, I think that the LGPL would be a better choice as far as end-
users are concerned, but, to the extent that an author might want to
make their software freely available but at least be able to see what
changes, improvements, or bugfixes someone has made if they use it in
their own binaries, this license provides that effect without
imposing obligations on completely separate source code which might
be used in combination with the MSCL-licensed software.

As with the MSPL, the MSCL seems to be fully compliant with the OSD.

+1.

--
-Chuck

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Chuck Swiger (chuck@...):

> As with the MSPL, the MSCL seems to be fully compliant with the OSD.

Both licences appear to be clearly OSD-compliant.

--
Cheers,             We write precisely            We say exactly
Rick Moen           Since such is our habit in    How to do a thing or how
rick@... Talking to machines;          Every detail works.
Excerpt from Prof. Touretzky's decss-haiku.txt @ http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/

[Matthew Flaschen]

Lawrence Rosen wrote:

> Other licenses deal with this in better ways, at least from the vantage point of distributors who do lots of
> combining of software into single-file downloads or distributions.

I agree.  I think MSCL is clearly OSD-compliant, but the file-based rule
is over-simplistic, and can result in ambiguities like this.

Matt Flaschen

[Jon Rosenberg (PBM)]

Hi Larry and Matthew -  This has really been one of the more interesting days since I became involved with the drafting of these licenses over two years ago.  Thank you, and everyone else on the alias, for the thoughtful feedback.  In particular, thank you for bringing this issue concerning .zip files and similar file packages to our attention. We are looking into various ways that the ambiguity can be addressed, but please know that the intent of the language was not to cause one software program that is licensed under a particular license, to be subject to the terms of the MCL, merely because the two are both contained in the same .zip, or similar type of file.

Thank you again for your feedback.  I'm going to be signing off for the night and look forward to continuing this discussion soon.

Jon


________________________________________
From: Matthew Flaschen [matthew.flaschen@...]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 8:02 PM
To: License Discuss
Subject: Re: For Approval: Microsoft Community License

Lawrence Rosen wrote:

> Other licenses deal with this in better ways, at least from the vantage point of distributors who do lots of
> combining of software into single-file downloads or distributions.

I agree.  I think MSCL is clearly OSD-compliant, but the file-based rule
is over-simplistic, and can result in ambiguities like this.

Matt Flaschen

[Shahnawaz Khan]

Hi Jon,

Would Microsft now discontinue the 'Shared Source' licenses structures? or would they fold into these new MS-PL/MS-CL?

This is really great news. Microsoft has a lot to contribute to the Open Source world. This would also signify the 'coming of age' of OpenSource licenses.

+1

Shahnawaz Khan

[Matthew Flaschen]

Shahnawaz Khan wrote:
> Hi Jon,
>
> Would Microsft now discontinue the 'Shared Source' licenses structures? or
> would they fold into these new MS-PL/MS-CL?

These /are/ part of Microsoft's "Shared Source" program, and aren't
really new.  They have been listed at
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/licensingbasics/sharedsourcelicenses.mspx
for a while (apparently at least since October 18, 2005).  My guess is
Microsoft will not stop using the other Shared Source licenses (e.g.
Microsoft Reference License and Microsoft Limited Community Licenses),
because though those licenses are certainly /not/ Open Source Microsoft
still intends to use them in some contexts.  Essentially, by submitting
these two licenses, they are asking OSI to agree that a *subset* of the
ongoing Microsoft Shared Source program is also Open Source.

Matt Flaschen

[John Cowan]

Jon Rosenberg (PBM) scripsit:

> Microsoft is pleased to submit the Microsoft Community License to the
> OSI for consideration as an OSI approved license.  

I welcome Microsoft to the OSD process, continue in my opinion that
the MS-CL is an Open Source license, and urge its approval by the
OSI with no reservations.

--
The experiences of the past show                John Cowan
that there has always been a discrepancy        cowan@...
between plans and performance.                  http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
        --Emperor Hirohito, August 1945

[Jon Rosenberg (PBM)]

I think that Matt has the right idea.  Microsoft has a wide range of licensing programs to serve a wide spectrum of customer, partner, and business needs.  This range includes the MS-PL and MS-CL, which we believe are approvable as open source licenses.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Flaschen [mailto:matthew.flaschen@...]
Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2007 8:23 PM
To: License Discuss
Subject: Re: For Approval: Microsoft Community License

Shahnawaz Khan wrote:
> Hi Jon,
>
> Would Microsft now discontinue the 'Shared Source' licenses structures? or
> would they fold into these new MS-PL/MS-CL?

These /are/ part of Microsoft's "Shared Source" program, and aren't
really new.  They have been listed at
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/licensingbasics/sharedsourcelicenses.mspx
for a while (apparently at least since October 18, 2005).  My guess is
Microsoft will not stop using the other Shared Source licenses (e.g.
Microsoft Reference License and Microsoft Limited Community Licenses),
because though those licenses are certainly /not/ Open Source Microsoft
still intends to use them in some contexts.  Essentially, by submitting
these two licenses, they are asking OSI to agree that a *subset* of the
ongoing Microsoft Shared Source program is also Open Source.

Matt Flaschen

[Chris Travers]

After reviewing the Open Source Definition and the License, I see no
concerns about this license.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers

[chris.vcf]

---

begin:vcard
fn:Chris Travers
n:Travers;Chris
email;internet:chris@...
tel;work:509-888-0220
tel;cell:509-630-7794
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

---