Let's take a step back: Currently we have the 3Dmodels license - https://github.com/KiCad/packages3D/wiki/Model-Licencing - which is modelled after the GEDA project (as easyw mentioned previously).
I think this is straight-forward and is consistent with how we would like to license symbols and footprints. If the existing 3Dmodels license is adapted for symbols and footprints (only a few sentences need to be changed), is this OK? Oliver On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Javier Serrano < [email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Oliver Walters < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> After that, people who contribute new symbols/fottprints/models should >>> make copyright and license notices part of that submission, exactly as for >>> source code. >> >> >> This is going to be very burdensome - it is already quite a lot of work >> to submit symbols / footprints against the KLC (KiCad Library Convention). >> Requiring users to add license files will: >> >> a) Bloat the libraries >> >> b) Be beyond the ability or patience of most contributors. >> >> I would strongly prefer an approach that essentially says "If you >> contribute to the library, the symbols / footprints will be placed under >> the existing license available in the LICENSE file." >> >> I had been operating under the assumption that we only had to consider >> the license that applies to library data AFTER they have been accepted into >> the library. >> >> Allowing per-file licensing is going to be a real mess. >> > > I understand your feeling. However, I think the fact that things will be > more burdensome in the future is: > > a) inevitable once you accept many of the symbols, footprints and models > are the subject of copyright. > b) not (very) related to a given choice of license. > > Not dealing with this properly exposes users to legal uncertainty, as I > argued earlier. There are many ways of dealing with this, and all have been > tested in the source code realm. What you suggest, for example, is very > similar to "Contributor License Agreements", which have their pros and > cons, documented extensively on the Internet. The owner of a symbol is its > creator. (S)he can then decide to grant rights through a license or give > you or any other person the right to do so on his/her behalf. But all of > this has to be done explicitly. There is no magic way of doing it without > any extra burden. > > I am a bit sorry to bring in all these complications, but I think as KiCad > gains a larger user base, in particular commercial users, we need to be a > bit more solid on the legal side of things. Hopefully we get to a state > where library contributors don't see this as much of an extra burden, as is > already the case for source code contributors. > > Cheers, > > Javier >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
