> So that the footprints are unusable for Ronja? You are distributing the packages for free. This meets the intent and terms of the license. A developer is free to use the symbol in any system, other than a distribution system, without restriction.
> Or could someone whitewash the symbols' licence by putting them on a > huge board (which is a design, or at least add some piece of working > electronic circuitry to it so it can be considered a design) and then > licencing the design formally under GFDL/GPL and then extracting the > symbols using the buffer and finally putting all the symbols into PCB > distro tarball? The distro tarball is a distribution no matter how many times you "launder" the symbols. > If John changes his licence to fix this it shouldn't have an effect > because he already released the symbols under the old licence. You would still fail to meet the intent of the license. > Or John could you licence your collection under GFDL? No. (* jcl *) On 2/20/06, Karel Kulhavy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 09:47:13PM -0500, John Luciani wrote: > > Karel, > > > > Distribution is a usage that is restricted. The restriction is > > that the distribution be performed without fee. > > To meet the intent of the version 0.1 license the distribution would have > > to be released using a license with the same restriction. > > > > You are correct that this should be stated clearly in the license. > > I will be making updates within the next few weeks and will update > > the license wording. > > > > Here is a draft of the new wording --- > > > > Permission is granted to distribute these symbols verbatim, > > individually or in a collection, provided that (1) no fee is charged > > and (2) the individual symbol or symbol collection is licensed under > > terms identical to this one. > > > > Permission is granted to make and distribute modified versions of > > these symbols individually or in a collection under the conditions for > > verbatim distribution, provided that the entire resulting distribution > > is released with license terms identical to this one. > > So that the footprints are unusable for Ronja? I need to have copy of the > footprint in the packages/ directory of gEDA. Because someone may delete > the footprint during changes and replace it with a different one > from your collection (for example smaller electrolytic capacitor) and > then regenerate the schematic. Wanting the developer to download the > symbol from Internet every time is not appropriate. > > Or could someone whitewash the symbols' licence by putting them on a > huge board (which is a design, or at least add some piece of working > electronic circuitry to it so it can be considered a design) and then > licencing the design formally under GFDL/GPL and then extracting the > symbols using the buffer and finally putting all the symbols into PCB > distro tarball? > > If John changes his licence to fix this it shouldn't have an effect > because he already released the symbols under the old licence. > > Or John could you licence your collection under GFDL? > > CL< > > > > (* jcl *) > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/19/06, Karel Kulhavy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello John > > > > > > My Ronja project is under GFDL licence. If I take all your symbols and > > > place them here: > > > http://ronja-svn.wservices.ch/cvs/browser/trunk/schematics/packages/ > > > is it considered usage or distribution? The directory is used by > > > gsch2pcb to generate PCBs from schematics in Ronja, but only at design > > > or modifications time, not at compile time. > > > > > > Your "No-Fee Symbol License Version 0.1" says that the symbols can be > > > distributed if it's done noncommercially (the distribution of Ronja > > > sources is noncommercial - everyone can download it for free), but > > > doesn't require the distribution to be done under the same licence, so > > > can it be GFDL? > > > > > > CL< > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.luciani.org > -- http://www.luciani.org
