On 02/27/2018 09:54 PM, Ben Finney wrote: > That conflict needs to be resolved, IMO. Do they intend to grant all the > DFSG freedoms to the work's recipient, or not?
My recommendation is to go back to NASA, asking if this will be relicenced under NOSO 2.0, if/when OSI states that that license is OSI compliant. It has been at least four years, and maybe even five, since NASA submitted that license. I doubt anybody expected approval to take so long, especially since NASA appears to not know what the issues triggering the denial are. When that license was first submitted, my impression was that NASA, along with sub-contractors, and organisations they work with, were going to do a wholesale license migration, from the hodgepodge they currently utilise, to NOSO 2.0, unless otherwise prohibited by law, from so doing. jonathon
