On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 9:10 AM William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
2. The primary objection/exception for OpenSSL/SSLeay would
   appear to be the advertising clauses. However, SSLeay contains 
   a rather unique and tricky exception written with good intentions
   (similar to 'good not evil')
 * The licence and distribution terms for any publically available version or
 * derivative of this code cannot be changed.  i.e. this code cannot simply be
 * copied and put under another distribution licence
 * [including the GNU Public Licence.]
This appears to make creation of a AL derived work near-impossible
(focusing on the first sentence alone.)
To be clear, the problem with the JSON license is that it discriminates against particular types of use, which has never been acceptable in FOSS licenses. The OpenSSL license is definitely poorly drafted, but it does not discriminate in the same way.

OpenSSL is either a mild copyleft (essentially FSF's interpretation, suggesting Category B) or merely makes explicit what is implicit in all permissive licenses, including Sec. 4 of the Apache license (suggesting Category A). I'm not familiar enough with the (long) history here to really know the author's intent, so I can't help categorize it into A/B/X, but in either case, it isn't directly comparable to the JSON situation.