* list wrote, On 09/03/09 11:14:
Am Montag, dem 09. M�r 2009 schrieb Alfred M. Szmidt:

  
   > > You might also want to contact the OSI about this.
   >
   > As far as I understand, OSI is more oriented to less-restrictive
   > open source licenses, right?

   No, by definition OSI is interested in all Free Software licenses
   (which they call "open source") - this includes the licenses with
   strong freedom protection like GNU GPLv3.

They are also interested in non-free licenses as well, e.g. the NASA
public license.
    

Stop spreading FUD!
It is true that this license was accepted by the OSI but rejectet by the FSF.
But it just was a rather minor problem why it was rejected by the FSF.
  
I'm puzzled - you say it is FUD; but then you seem to agree with him.

How is it FUD?

Sam