I revised the symbol license text to reflect some of the suggestions
people made. Please find it below. I am calling for comments &
flames. Assuming people like it, I will
put it onto the gEDA webpage this weekend some time.
BTW: I removed all references to footprints. You folks over on the
PCB side of the fence are of course welcome to use the same text, but
you'll need to do s/symbol/footprint/ and s/gEDA\/gaf/PCB/, but
besides that, it's ready to use. If you want, I'm happy to do the
edits. But since I don't have access to your web server I can't put
it up. (And you probably want to think about the issue for yourselves
anyway.)
FWIW, I did not explicitly adopt DJ's notion of a dist-
vs. use-license, even though I do like it very much. My reasoning was
this:
* From a legal standpoint, I figured it was safer to piggyback on the
FSF's verbiage than trying to write our own. IANAL, but they do have
lawyers vetting their stuff, so they should know what they are doing
-- in principle at least!
* From the standpoint of writing something up for us, I decided I
didn't want to get involved in legal hair-splitting about what "use"
and "distribution" mean, since it would make any text wordy and
confusing.
* Also, I didn't want to contribute to the population explosion of
open-source licences. Therefore, just sticking to the GPL + exemption
seemed like the right thing to do.
I *did* write about dist vs. use on our licence web page, so that our
reasoning and intent is clear.
Stuart
----------------------------------------------------------------
A word about licensing.
All software components of gEDA/gaf are released under the GNU Public
License (GPL). However, some confusion exists about the schematic
symbols. What license do they use? Will GPL symbols "infect" your
design, thereby requiring you to release your design to the public? If
you modify the symbols, must you release the modified versions under
the GPL?
The goal of the gEDA Project is to provide an open-source EDA Suite
which may be used for commerical as well as non-commercial projects.
Our tools are aimed for use by students, educators, consultants,
hobbiests, and -- yes -- corporate engineers. We are not interested
in exerting any control over your designs, or forcing you to reveal
proprietary information contained in your designs.
Symbols are similar to the font files used in document
processing software -- they are graphical objects used to express your
ideas. We want you to retain control of your own ideas (your design),
while the gEDA Project retains a say in how you redistribute the
symbols themselves.
There are three ways a symbol might be distributed:
1. As part of a symbol library, or individually as a .sym file
(i.e. as a symbol itself).
2. Embedded in a .sch file (i.e. part of the soft, or editable copy
of a design).
3. The resulting graphical expression on a schematic diagram (i.e. as
part of the hard, or non-editable copy of a design, whether as a
print file or as a paper copy).
There is a distinction between cases 1 and (2, 3). In case 1, the
object of interest is the symbol library (or individual symbol)
itself. In case (2, 3), the object of interest is the design.
Some label case 1 "distribution", and cases (2, 3) "use" of the symbol.
Our goals for the symbols are:
* We wish to distribute the symbols under a licencing scheme which
encourages that you give back to the community if you redistribute the
the symbols themselves -- whether modified or unmodified. This is
case 1 distribution. The GPL ensures this.
* We wish to specifically prohibit anybody from building gEDA's
symbols into their *software* products, and then placing restrictions
on how the resulting product may be used. If you bundle gEDA symbols
-- whether modified or unmodified -- into your software and then
distribute it, then you must allow for the software's (and symbols')
continued redistribution under the GPL. Again, this is case 1
distribution; the GPL ensures this.
* However, we do not wish to "infect" your *electronic* design, or
force you to release your proprietary design information if you use or
embedd gEDA symbols in your design. This is case (2, 3) use.
The Free Software Foundation has recognized a possible conflict of
the base GPL with the use of fonts -- and, by analogy, symbols.
Their solution is to use an exemption clause in the GPL
which you explicitly insert for fonts. Read about it here:
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#FontException
Therefore, using this as a template, all symbols released with
gEDA/gaf are covered under the GPL with the following exeption clause:
As a special exception, if you create a design which uses this symbol,
and embed this symbol or unaltered portions of this symbol into the
design, this symbol does not by itself cause the resulting design to
be covered by the GNU General Public License. This exception does not
however invalidate any other reasons why the design itself might be
covered by the GNU General Public License. If you modify this
symbol, you may extend this exception to your version of the
symbol, but you are not obligated to do so. If you do not
wish to do so, delete this exception statement from your version.
The idea is that case 1 redistribution is covered under the GPL, but
distribution of your design per cases (2, 3) is exempt from the GPL.
This is the scheme under which the gEDA Project licenses its symbols.
_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
