New license request: HPND-export2-US

[jrisc]

1. License Name: HPND with US Government export control warning and 2 disclaimers
2. Short identifier: HPND-export-US-2disclaimers
3. License Author or steward: Unknown
4. Comments: This license is similar to HPND-export-US, but it has an additional disclaimer.

This license is used in Fedora, and was found during license review:
https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data/-/issues/462
5. License Request Url: http://tools.spdx.org/app/license_requests/343
6. URL(s): https://github.com/krb5/krb5/blob/krb5-1.21.2-final/NOTICE#L111-L133, https://web.mit.edu/kerberos/krb5-1.21/doc/mitK5license.html
7. OSI Status: Not Submitted
8. Example Projects: https://web.mit.edu/kerberos/

[jlovejoy]

so, that additional disclaimer is:
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS” AND WITHOUT ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

added at the end and which is similar in meaning to the disclaimer already present:
M.I.T. makes no representations about the suitability of this software for any purpose. It is provided "as is" without express or implied warranty.

can we consider this non-substantive... ?? it's one of those close ones...

@richardfontana @swinslow - thoughts??

[karsten-klein]

ScanCode
reference id: mit-no-advert-export-control
matched id: mit-no-advert-export-control

{metæffekt} Universe
canonical name: Permission Terms (with export note; variant 001)
short name: PT-with-export-note-Var-01
Markers: Export Restriction Note (US), No Warranty Marker

[jlovejoy]

ok, to restate, this is a match to HPND-export-US, except for:

• the names, which can be accommodate with markup
• and the additional disclaimer added to the end

So I think that means should this be a new license or could we make that extra paragraph optional in the existing HPND-export-US
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS” AND WITHOUT ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
I could go either way - I do think this additional paragraph restates the same things as is said above it, but in a slightly differently worded/ordered way.

[swinslow]

Where there's a full additional disclaimer sentence, I'm not inclined to assume that it can be accommodated with markup. Our usual rule is that if there's any reasonable argument that it could be substantively different, then we wouldn't want to accommodate via markup. I tend to think this leans towards that (regardless of how meaningfully different I personally think it actually would be in practice).

The only thing pushing me potentially in the other direction here, is that for "standard" HPND, the version on the OSI list is already heavily marked up with optional sections (including HPND's various disclaimers). We've inherited those marked-up disclaimers from the OSI version.

Does that mean that our markup for other HPND variant licenses should be a little more accommodating of treating disclaimers as "optional" text? If it's a disclaimer that's exactly or nearly the same as one of the ones in HPND itself, I'd say probably yes. If it's not, I think it's a harder call.

Personally I still lean towards treating this one as warranting a separate ID, but I could support handling via markup if that's others' preference here.

[jlovejoy]

@swinslow - okay, so if a new license, than maybe we can go with HPND-export2-US?

[jlovejoy]

went ahead and made a PR for this one

[swinslow]

+1 to HPND-export2-us, thanks @jlovejoy!

License Inclusion Decision

Decision:

• approved
• not approved

Name

HPND with US Government export control and 2 disclaimers

License ID

HPND-export2-US

XML markup

N/A

Notes

This license is very similar to HPND-export-US, but adds a second disclaimer.

Next steps

If the license has been accepted, please follow the accepted-license process to create the PR.

[github-actions]

This new license/exception request has been accepted and the information for the license/exception has been merged to the repository. Thank you to everyone who has participated!
The license/exception will be published at https://spdx.org/licenses/ as part of the next SPDX License List release, which is expected to be in three months' time or sooner. In the interim, the new license will appear on the license list preview site at https://spdx.github.io/license-list-data/.
This is an automated message.