[openssl-dev] We're working on license changes

[Salz, Rich]

>  Who is "us"?

The openssl dev team.

> It is natural for a lawyer to tell you to require lots of things to protect whatever entity is paying them.

Well, yeah, sure.  But I would hope that the bono-fides of the SFLC and Eben Moglen  aren't being called into question.

>For an example of this, see Mozilla, in particular see [1], particularly sections 2, 3, and 4. See also [2] where Mozilla recently gave up the requirement to have the agreement signed. Please let me know if you want me to put you in touch with the licensing people at Mozilla who can probably help you do the same.

Sure, please contact me (rsalz at openssl.org)

> To be clear, I don't have any problem with the OpenSSL Foundation being a for-profit corporation. But, it does make for a very different situation than how the Apache Software Foundation[3] or even Mozilla operates, and I think that distinction is very important when it comes to licensing.

Since Matt has explained that we're not a for-profit corporation, I assume that this is no longer a concern for you.  We are *not* a tax-exempt charitable organization, but we are not for profit.