Hi Astron, Am Dienstag, 19. Juni 2012, 02:11:27 schrieb Stefan Knorr: > Hi Björn, > > > Concerning my motivation: it is not marketing. I care about Free Software. > > I think this service is simply another peace we need to solve the big > > Free- Software-Puzzle. It does happen to legally belong to a company and > > it might make money (tm) but most importantly it follows and serves > > Free-Software principles. > > Making money is always a laudable goal for a business. ;)
I simply wanted to make the point that this 'product' is not the way my consultancy makes money. It is basically the result of my (mostly) voluntary work in Free Software. As there was nothing out there, I decided to start a new project, which I am OpenSourceing right now. To put it in the company simply makes things (like handling money) easier for me. > > > What exactly is meant by "unless I stated something different before"? > > > Does > > > that mean I can put proprietary data on UserWeave as long as I've > > > released > > > it elsewhere under a proprietary license before I joined UserWeave? > > > (I'm sure it doesn't, but given that this is a legally-binding > > > agreement, > > > this phrase should be worded differently or taken out altogether.) > > > > There is a potential long term business model (tm). The idea: people that > > want to use the service can pay for not having their data released and > > published. This money shall be used to to finace the development and > > hosting of the software under the best of Free Softwares principles. But > > it will always be free of charge for projects working in the open. So > > this "state"ment is meant to refer to this potential business model. I > > will have to think about rephrasing it. I have been talking to some open > > knowledge foundation guys before, perhaps they can help. > > Please do think about rephrasing it. For instance, if we upload (other > people's) icons there, this will create a huge licensing issue for us. > It can be hard to track down everyone who's worked on an icon and it > will be even harder to convince them to relicense their icons "just" for > research. > > Maybe you could ask for people to use an "OSI-approved open source > license"/"GNU-approved free license" instead and just default to CC-by? Thanks for pointing me to this misunderstanding. I actually do not want to affect the license of things that get tested (e.g. Icons). People uploading them should be aware that they need to have the right to use them. The whole licensing issue should only affect things that get actually produced on UserWeave, like surveys, personas etc. So sorry for the misunderstanding here. As it is FreeSoftware and I am not really the best person for legal stuff - anyone around with a good idea how to get this right? Hope that clarifies it all a bit! Cheers, Björn > > Astron. -- www.OpenUsability.org www.OpenSource-Usability-Labs.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
