Re: MPL 2.0 published!

[Alexis Richardson]

Congratulations!

<throws hat in the air>



On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Luis Villa <lu...@tieguy.org> wrote:
> Hi, mpl-update and governance lists-
>
> On behalf of the other maintainers, I'm excited to announce the publication
> of version 2.0 of the Mozilla Public License
> (html<http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/>,
> txt <http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/index.txt>). We hope that this license
> will serve its users (including Mozilla) well for the next decade, just as
> MPL 1.1 did.
>
> For those of you who have been following along throughout the process,
> there are no surprises in the text below, but I want to particularly
> highlight two things:
>
>   - the acknowledgements section, because this group (including both named
>   parties below, names I have forgotten, and people who contributed
>   semi-anonymously through co-ment) has been genuinely helpful and important
>   to the process, even when we have disagreed.
>    - the note on approval by the OSI and FSF. This is something I've
>   mentioned in passing, but have not discussed much, so it may count as news
>   even here. I believe that having this approval at publication time is a
>   first for a new license. (The OSI link is not live yet, but should be
>   shortly.)
>
> About the MPL
>
> **Just like version 1.1, version 2.0 of the Mozilla Public License is a
> "file-level copyleft" license. The license is designed to encourage
> contributors to share modifications they make to MPL-licensed code, while
> still allowing users to create projects that combine MPL-licensed code with
> code under other licenses (either open or proprietary).
>
> MPL 2.0, like MPL 1.1 before it, has been approved as a free software
> license by the Free Software
> Foundation<http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#MPL-2.0>,
> and as an Open Source license by the Open Source
> Initiative<http://www.opensource.org/licenses/MPL-2.0>
> .
> What's New
>
> The result of a two year revision process that included feedback and
> suggestions from the Mozilla community, users of the MPL (both community
> and corporate), and the broader open source legal community, MPL 2.0
> contains several important changes from MPL 1.1. In particular, MPL 2.0:
>
>   - is simpler and shorter, using the past 10 years of in-practice
>   application of the license to help better understand what is and isn't
>   necessary in an open source license.
>   - is modernized for recent changes in copyright law, and incorporates
>   feedback from lawyers outside the United States on issues of applicability
>   in non-US jurisdictions.
>   - provides patent protections for contributors more in line with those
>   of other open source licenses, and allows an entire community of
>   contributors to protect any contributor if they are sued.
>   - provides compatibility with the Apache and GPL licenses, making code
>   reuse and redistribution easier.
>
> For a more complete list of changes, see the FAQ's entry on "what has
> changed <http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/Revision-FAQ.html#what-has-changed>
> ."
> Using MPL 2.0
>
> The MPL FAQ explains how to use MPL 2.0 for new
> code<http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/FAQ.html#apply>,
> and the MPL Revision FAQ explains how to use MPL 2.0 for code originally
> licensed under MPL
> 1.1<http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/Revision-FAQ.html#how-do-i-upgrade>
> .
>
> The Mozilla Project has announced that it will move to the new
> license<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.governance/browse_thread/thread/f57b06a682cbd289#>.
> Further plans and procedures for moving to MPL will be announced on
> appropriate newsgroups, including
> mozilla-governance<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.governance/topics>
> .
> Other Materials
>
> Along with the release of MPL 2.0, we have released a variety of materials
> designed to help answer questions about the new license.
>
>   - *FAQ* <http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/FAQ.html>: The MPL FAQ answers
>   critical questions about the license. We will continue to revise and update
>   this as new questions are asked.
>   - *Revision Process FAQ<http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/Revision-FAQ.html>
>   :* The Revision Process FAQ answers questions about the process we
>   followed to upgrade the license from 1.1 to 2.0, including details on the
>   changes made to the license.
>   - *Historical Information
> <http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/historical.html>:*We've collected a
> variety of historical information about previous versions
>   of the license, including old license texts and license FAQs, in one place,
>   for reference.
>
> Acknowledgements
>
> Any two-year long process will necessarily involve feedback and involvement
> from too many people to thank completely in one place. With apologies to
> those we have overlooked, the maintainer and peers would like to thank the
> following people, who have been particularly helpful in various areas:
>
>   - Members of the mozilla-governance-mpl newsgroup, particularly
>   including Benoit Jacob, Ben Bucksch, Alexis Richardson, and Michael Kay.
>   Many of this group's suggestions made it into the license, but even when
>   the suggestions couldn't be incorporated, they pushed to make the license
>   better.
>   - Heather Meeker and Karen Copenhaver, who both contributed a
>   substantial amount of time and expertise, particularly during the critical
>   beta period when much wordsmithing was necessary.
>   - Till Jaeger, who was instrumental in helping us think through
>   international copyright issues.
>   - Daniel German and other members of his research group, whose useful
>   advice and research helped us understand how licenses are deployed in the
>   wild.
>   - Brett Smith, Eben Moglen, Aaron Williamson, James Vasile, and Richard
>   Fontana, who all gave helpful feedback in many areas, but particularly in
>   the area of GPL compatibility.
>   - Simon Phipps and Karl Fogel, who both were very helpful in shepherding
>   the license through the OSI process.
>   - The fine folks in Apache's legal team, who were helpful in discussing
>   Apache compatibility issues early in the process.
>   - Members of the FSF-E's Freedom Task Force, as well as many other
>   in-house lawyers from several large software firms who preferred not to be
>   named publicly but quietly gave their time and specific advice to help
>   improve the license.
>   - The creators of the open source software tools used to write the
>   license, particularly the co-ment team <http://co-ment.com/>, G.P.
>   Halkes of dwdiff <http://os.ghalkes.nl/dwdiff.html>, and John MacFarlane
>   of pandoc <http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/>.
>
> Contacting Us
>
> If you have any questions about the new MPL, please contact
> lice...@mozilla.org.
>
> Luis, on behalf of the maintainer and peers (Mitchell Baker, Harvey
> Anderson, Gervase Markham, and Heather Meeker)
> _______________________________________________
> governance-mpl-update mailing list
> governance...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance-mpl-update

[Luis Villa]

[Till Jaeger]

Dear Luis,

Thanks for your work! We have published a news article about the launch of
MPL 2.0:
http://www.ifross.org/artikel/mozilla-public-license-20-ver-ffentlicht

Best regards,

Till

--
Dr. Till Jaeger
Certified Copyright and Media Law Attorney

______________________________________________________________

JBB Rechtsanwälte
Christinenstraße 18/19 | 10119 Berlin
Tel. +49.30.443 765 0 | Fax +49.30.443 765 22
www.jbb.de

JBB Rechtsanwälte Jaschinski Biere Brexl Partnerschaft
Sitz der Partnerschaftsgesellschaft: Berlin
Registergericht AG Charlottenburg | PR 609 B
______________________________________________________________

[Luis Villa]

Thanks, Till! Much appreciated.

[Mitchell Baker]

Yes, thanks very much for spreading the knowledge

Mitchell