[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date /
thread ]
[ Next by date /
thread => ]
On Sunday 17 October 2004 10:20 am, Peter Lloyd-Jones wrote:
Hi I have been following this debate with interest. I do believe however that one must try and "pay" for everything.
That terminology again. I believe what you might have meant was: one must try and contribute to software that you support/use. (nobody pays for the air we breathe etc.)
To this end I became a moderator for the JMRI (Java Model Railway Interface) group. This is freebie (I use the word deliberately)
- but wrongly -
software. One of the programs is called DecoderPro.
There is nothing called freebie software, if you have any interest in keeping the source code for this project available, you MUST be strict about your terms. This is the crucial area of small print - you MUST approach the issue with accuracy, precision and facts, not supposition or guesswork. Know where you stand and understand the terms. Always provide a URL when you introduce a new group / project. http://jmri.sourceforge.net/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/jmri/ License OSI Approved Artistic License http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/jmri/apps/DecoderPro/COPYING?rev=1.1.1.1&view=markup So it's OSI approved so it is Open Source software, not freebie software, nor free software because the licence is OLD and this version isn't GPL compatible. (Original) Artistic License We cannot say that this is a free software license because it is too vague; some passages are too clever for their own good, and their meaning is not clear. We urge you to avoid using it, except as part of the disjunctive license of Perl. The problems are matters of wording, not substance. There is a revised version of the Artistic License (dubbed "Artistic License 2.0") which is a free software license, and even compatible with the GNU GPL. This license is being considered for use in Perl 6. If you are thinking of releasing a program under the Artistic License, please do investigate other GPL-compatible, Free Software licensing options listed here first. http://www.fsf.org/licenses/license-list.html#ArtisticLicense Please pass on these comments to the project developers. A weak or vague licence is an invitation for the code to be secreted into proprietary hands. There is no good reason to use the version of the Artistic Licence currently in use in the code. It has been assessed by legal brains far more knowledgeable than you or I (or probably the project developers) and found to be lacking. There is a clear recommendation and a revised licence that covers the issue. When a licence is lacking AND has already been revised, it is foolhardy to continue using the inadequate version. Either change to a different licence or update NOW! It's like not patching a security hole in the kernel. Using the current version of your licence could sink the entire project.
BUT Folllowing a very good write up in the American Model Railway Press of the product a commercial software developer who makes model railway software, has now copyrighted (or something)
Again, accuracy and precision please. They've registered the domain, that's all, maybe they'll register a trademark as Adrian suggested but that takes time. Trademarks only concern you if you are trading. :-) This is open source, who's trading? Besides, changing a project name slightly is nothing compared to losing the entire codebase to a proprietary licence.
the domain name DecoderPro.com (and others from the software suite).
Who needs .com? This is open source software, most open source software projects are happy to use .org. THINK. Don't get herded into a panic response over a domain suffix. Who cares whether it's .com or .org as long as Google can find it! You have the code, you have the developers, the most recent code should therefore remain available via your choice of domain name and SourceForge. However, if you don't update the licence, you might find that someone takes the entire project into a proprietary licence and then you WILL lose out. Besides, using .com could add to the confusion about the software and the licence. com = commercial - making people think proprietary. Fuss about the licence, not the domain and get it sorted, QUICK. 1. Download all available packages NOW. 2. strike while the iron is hot and use the author angst to deal with the real problem.
Needless to say the authors are feeling "hacked off"!
Then they are being petulant and have taken their eye(s) completely off the ball. The problem is NOT the domain name, it's the vagueness of the licence! JRMI is not safe. Fix the problem. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.codehelp.co.uk/ http://www.dclug.org.uk/ http://www.isbn.org.uk/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/isbnsearch/ http://www.biglumber.com/x/web?qs=0x8801094A28BCB3E3
Attachment:
pgp00044.pgp
Description: PGP signature