Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

On 29 January 2016 at 11:04, Elmar Stellnberger wrote: > I mean the original ancient vim license of the times before GPLv2+. But as you see they moved on from that. And for good reasons. -- Cheers, Andrew

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

On 01/21/2016 05:09 PM, Elmar Stellnberger wrote: There are licenses like the vim license which force developers to ship their patches proactively to the upstream developers and thus possibly to the public. If the vim license does not discriminate against a certain field of endeavour this

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

I mean the original ancient vim license of the times before GPLv2+. Am 2016-01-29 um 11:03 schrieb Anthony DeRobertis: On 01/21/2016 05:09 PM, Elmar Stellnberger wrote: There are licenses like the vim license which force developers to ship their patches proactively to the upstream developers

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

Le Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:49:51PM +0100, Elmar Stellnberger a écrit : > > In order to improve the situation and make this software available to a > broader public I have once more designed a completely new license from > scratch: the so called 'Convertible Free Software License'. It shall give

Re: Please do not compound license proliferation (was: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org)

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 14:33:42 +1100 Ben Finney wrote: > Elmar Stellnberger writes: > > > I have various issues about current licenses. Just see at what makes > > this license pretty much different from other established licenses. > > Let us discuss this in detail when the

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

> > For one thing, there is the problem of license proliferation. > > Yes that is certainly a problem; though there are some attempts to > mitigate these issues: > * it can be used together with any other OSS compatible license. For copyleft licenses, it can't, because those licenses would also

C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

Dear Fellows of the Debian Legal List, Currently most of the software available via my homepage www.elstel.org is under S-FSL, a license which guarantees free usage and certain modification rights but which is not a true open source license. Debian packages would have been available for

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

Dear Riley Baird, Am 2016-01-21 um 22:44 schrieb Riley Baird: Hi, In order to improve the situation and make this software available to a broader public I have once more designed a completely new license from scratch: the so called 'Convertible Free Software License'. It's almost never

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

Hi Jonathon, Am 2016-01-21 um 22:33 schrieb jonathon: > > > On 21/01/2016 21:49, Elmar Stellnberger wrote: > >> a broader public I have once more designed a completely new license from scratch: > > What problem are you trying with this license, that other licenses don't > solve? > I have

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

Hi, >In order to improve the situation and make this software available to > a broader public I have once more designed a completely new license from > scratch: the so called 'Convertible Free Software License'. It's almost never a good idea to make your own license. And I know how you

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

On 21/01/2016 21:49, Elmar Stellnberger wrote: > a broader public I have once more designed a completely new license from > scratch: What problem are you trying with this license, that other licenses don't solve? > 3. It is your obligation that the changed version of your sources will > be

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

On 21/01/16 22:33, jonathon wrote: 5. When applying changes to the source code you need to leave your name, your email address and the date of your modifications so that other people may contact you. Fails the Desert Island Test jonathon Maybe not. a) The guy could have an email address

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

> Also, I do not like the idea of someone being able > to change the licence of my derived work without my permission. Actually, I changed my mind about this. I do think it is fine to allow people to re-licence my derived work, I just do not think that it should only be the original authors that

Please do not compound license proliferation (was: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org)

Elmar Stellnberger writes: > I have various issues about current licenses. Just see at what makes > this license pretty much different from other established licenses. > Let us discuss this in detail when the license should be fit for > approval. Please do not compound the

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

Some general feedback: On 21/01/16 22:49, Elmar Stellnberger wrote: CONVERTIBLE FREE SOFTWARE LICENSE Version 0.8, 2016-01-21 , *** This is just a draft *** copyright 2016, by Elmar Stellnberger Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document. You must

Re: C-FSL: a new license for software from elstel.org

> 3. It is your obligation that the changed version of your sources will > be available to the public for free. Available for free means that there > will be no undue hinderance in obtaining the given item like a > registration of the person who wants to download or obtain the given > item.