On Monday 05 September 2005 21:51, Timothy Miller wrote: > Based on feedback from the mailing list, this is the "final" licensing > statement. This will be modified to refer to either the GPL or LGPL, > as necessary, and if I've made a mistake, please let me know. Works > licensed under MIT or BSD licenses will not need this statement. > > > /* > DUAL LICENSING > > (1) This Work is licensed under LGPL 2.0. You have the right to use and > modify this Work, as long as you publish your changes to the Work. > > (2) This Work is also licensed as a proprietary work, all rights > belonging to Traversal Technology. Traversal Technology may use this > Work under those terms and has the right to publish, license, and sell > this Work and derivative works as they see fit, all rights reserved. > To remove these rights, you must remove this clause.
"All rights reserved"? What does that mean here?
> (3) Use of this work without clause (2) forfeits the right to use any
> trademarks owned by Traversal Technology, the Open Graphics Project, or
> related organizations.
>
> (4) Patches, modifications, and extensions ("patches") to this Work
> that are submitted to the Open Graphics Project, the Open Graphics
> Mailing List, directly to Traversal Technology must be SIGNED by the
> author of said patch, granting Traversal Technology "rights to use"
> under clause (2), as well as clause (1). Unsigned patches will be
> ignored.
>
> (5) Patches [see (4)] committed directly to an officially recognized
> source code repository are signed implicitly. Those who have write
> access to such a repository and who commit patches to that repository
> grant Traversal Technology under clause (2), as well as clause (1), by
> virtue of having write access and choosing to submit patches.
I think there should be something in here about that the committer is
responsible for being at least reasonably sure that the source code he
commits, if written by a third party, is appropriately licenced. Like the
signing off used in Linux, where have a patch that is first signed off by the
original submittor, then by someone who checked it and perhaps changed it a
little, then by whoever owns the subsystem, and so on. It's obvious, but I
think it should be explicit.
> (6) You retain the right to use the contents of your patches, and you
> may retain copyright to your patches. Sections (1) through (5) still
> apply. For special situations, you are encouraged to add comments to the
> "contributions" section of this Work, indicating the nature of your
> patch.
Perhaps a sentence to the tune of "This is not an exclusive license." should
be prepended here.
Lourens
pgpeIyFQp8lZF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
