Philip McGrath schreef op wo 15-06-2022 om 15:06 [-0400]:
> I agree that the choice-of-law language is less than friendly to users.
> 
> The FSF has issued an opinion [1] that the APSL 2.0 is a free software 
> license: they say that "Apple's lawyers worked with the FSF to produce a 
> license that would qualify" (after problems with earlier versions of the 
> license)

I am not contesting that FSF considers APSL 2.0 to be a free software
license.  In fact, I looked at that web page to look at why FSF
considers it to be a free software license.  But I didn't find any
answer about the ‘dispute resolution’ clause.  So it seems to me that
FSF overlooked that particular issue, considered it acceptable because
of the US being based in the US, or considered it acceptable due to
some other (unknown) reason.

In case of the FSF overlooking things: mistakes can and should be
corrected (this is a free software distro!).  In case of US-centrism:
err, no.  In case of an unknwon reason: reason is unknown.

The point is being free, not being stamped as free by the FSF.

> IIUC, (guix licenses) only defines FSDG-compatible licenses.

Apparently, it doesn't, given the presence of the APSL 2.0, though
that's a bug.

> Certainly there are broader community governance questions
> implicated, but I don't think this patch needs to resolve them.

I did not ask anything about community governance?

Greetings,
Maxime.