The definitions of the Open Source Initiative (OSD) and the FSF (FSFD) are essential in the sense that they qualify Free or Open Source Licenses (FOS License) in regard to the rights and freedoms they confer (the two main lists of licenses are made on their base). However, they do not meet an other industrial need: the identification and classification of obligations (which differ between each license) for the licenses and their variants (especially when there are additional terms – for instance exceptions or interpretations). Thus, based on existing definitions and as a complement to their action against license proliferation, it seems necessary to consider the drafting of such additional nomenclature. Indeed, this work would be useful for two reasons: to meet customer's expectation in relation with the development of services around free software (so they can state precisely, but not limited to, the type of licenses they require); and to back advances made in computerization and software identifications of the components and their licenses (both community projects like SPDX, QSOS or business's like Blackduck). Firstly, the relevance of the approach itself will be discussed. Its sole purpose is to characterize a license or its variants on a common nomenclature (detailed and scalable), this the method can only be descriptive and cannot replace the current process of writing the licenses. It will participate in the dissemination of good practices for distributing free software, will contribute movement to the rationalization and standardization in favor of major licenses, and may possibly be based on an international standardization bodies. The second part of the presentation will be an opportunity to present a first classification, based both on existing work on personal thoughts. Indeed, it seems possible to use the classic typology (obligation to give, to do and to not do) while adding specific references to free licenses such as obligation for the various IP rights granted - or excluded - as well as those organizing the formalism associated with the license. Finally, this classification can include other particular elements of licenses such as scope and trigger.