steel... gpl licensing...
[1/5] from: maximo:meteorstudios at: 28-Aug-2003 20:38
hi all,
I am wondering what you all think of gpl licensing.
Do some of you hate it, or have alternate open source or personal licenses which are
less restrictive (or more, depending on your side of the fence?) yet legaly binding enough
that you feel safe.
I'm about to suggest making the STEEL project a gpl based tool with alternative licensing
in certain circumstances (like commercial and contributor licenses). I just want to
take a pulse of the community to see if I'll be hated for doing so...
I'm not all sure about the gpl license itself, yet (I'll have to print it and read it
again a few times, but it seemed quite fair when I read it last week...)
some code in steel would be released with lesser gpl licensing too... (free to distribute
but not to modify)
what do you all think...
since I'm using mail space... just a quick update on STEEL documentaion...
I have to clear up a last minute problem I had with liquid-vid, building up a tutorial
for it (which is why the updated site is STILL not online). I'll update the site and
you'll see that it is much more functional. The small tutorial for liquid-vid should
basically get you up and running with it in a matter of minutes. ... I think I'm going
to cry, now... I've been hitting documentation, licensing and site layout almost daily
for the last 2 1/2 weeks now, and its still not online ... 8.-(
-MAx
-------------
Steel project coordinator
http://www.rebol.it/~steel
[2/5] from: andrew:martin:colenso:school at: 29-Aug-2003 14:22
Max wrote:
> ...alternate open source or personal licenses which are less
restrictive (or more, depending on your side of the fence?) yet legaly
binding enough that you feel safe.
There's the Creative Commons licences which could be of interest? (I
can't remember the URL.)
Andrew J Martin
Attendance Officer &
Information Systems Trouble Shooter
Colenso High School
Arnold Street, Napier.
Tel: 64-6-8310180 ext 826
Fax: 64-6-8336759
http://colenso.net/scripts/Wiki.r?AJM
http://www.colenso.school.nz/
DISCLAIMER: Colenso High School and its Board of Trustees is not responsible (or legally
liable) for materials distributed to or acquired from user e-mail accounts. You can report
any
misuse of an e-mail account to our ICT Manager and the complaint will be investigated.
(Misuse can come in many forms, but can be viewed as any material sent/received that
indicate or suggest pornography, unethical or illegal solicitation, racism, sexism, inappropriate
language and/or other issues described in our Acceptable Use Policy.)
All outgoing messages are certified virus-free by McAfee GroupShield Exchange 5.10.285.0
Phone: +64 6 843 5095 or Fax: +64 6 833 6759 or E-mail: [postmaster--colenso--school--nz]
[3/5] from: andreas:bolka:gmx at: 29-Aug-2003 9:46
Friday, August 29, 2003, 2:38:01 AM, Maxim wrote:
> I'm about to suggest making the STEEL project a gpl based tool with
> alternative licensing in certain circumstances (like commercial and
> contributor licenses).
Just a quick note re GPL and re-licensing on demand.
One problem with this approach is, that as soon as someone contributes
to the project and releases his contributions under the GPL you cannot
just simply re-license those contributions anymore - if you use those
contributions you're bound to the GPL-license yourself.
So as long as you're the only one working on a project (e.g. Steel),
dual licensing under GPL and on-demand licenses for commercial users
are a perfectly fine thing. If some day someone contributes something
vital to your project, and you want to incorporate that contribution
into the "main" codebase, you're bound to the GPL use for those
contributions. Or you'll have to try and get a custom license from the
contributor.
I prefer the Academic Free License for my open source projects -
basically, the AFL is a non-viral license like the MIT/X11 licenses.
Imho GPL licensing hinders REBOL's progress as it kind of blocks
REBOL's subversive potential - no way to silently sneak a REBOL
solution into your company, you must either buy a commercial license
or break the GPL.
--
Best regards,
Andreas
[4/5] from: AJMartin::orcon::net::nz at: 30-Aug-2003 14:31
> There's the Creative Commons licences which could be of interest?
http://creativecommons.org
Andrew J Martin
ICQ: 26227169
http://www.rebol.it/Valley/
http://valley.orcon.net.nz/
http://Valley.150m.com/
[5/5] from: jvargas:whywire at: 30-Aug-2003 8:58
Hi Max.
I personally like the MIT or BSD style licenses. But if what you want
to ensure is that all contributions or modifications go back into steel
the GLP or LGPL are the way to go. You will need some extra licensing
for the commercial purposes then.
Cheers,
Jaime
On Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 08:38 PM, Maxim Olivier-Adlhoch wrote: