http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affero_General_Public_License
Essentially equivalent to the GPL V3 but also closes the ASP Loophole that was in GPL V2. It is considered to be orientated towards web space. On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Timothy Normand Miller <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:42 AM, Troy Benjegerdes <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Proposal: come up with set of goals and desires rather than legal >> > text. Send these goals over to license-discuss. I am happy to >> > Shepard this process. Let them ensure that whatever goals are desired >> > still is "open source". Once we have that then it requires taking the >> > time (and possibly money) to find a lawyer willing to write the >> > license. This is the only way you are going to get a useful license >> > that may stand up in court. >> > >> > In this case it seems almost like GPLv2 would meet your needs exactly. >> > >> > I do have some concerns that the GPL is meant for code, not hardware, >> > but since the hardware actually *is* code (verilog or whatever) this >> > isn't a real concern. >> >> There is going to be some problem with this, and we're only going to >> find it out with lots of review, and maybe litigation. This is why >> I like explicit dual (or triple, or more) license models. >> >> I'd also propose we start *from the beginning* by tracking every >> contributor, so that if at some point we do need to change the license, >> each and every contributor can be offered some sort of notification to >> either approve the new license, or state their code must be cleanroomed >> for a new license. >> > > Yeah. Like people have to ask me to be allowed to make contributions, so > I can grill them on the terms that they have to agree to. > > >> >> This is technically a project policy, with the goal of allowing migration >> to a new license. Linux, for example, has no way to move to anything other >> than GPLv2. >> >> > Suggestion: start with GPLv2 because it sounds like what you want >> > already. Let the discussion play out and then possibly change it >> > later. >> >> how about: GPLv2, or at your option, GPLv3, or AGPLv3, or any later >> version >> >> > I would however consider an apache like patent retaliation clause ("if >> > you sue us over patent issues, you lose your rights to use the >> > software"). >> > >> > > Ok. So at the very least, I need two documents, one for licensing >> terms, >> > > the other for project policy. >> > >> > Yes. You may also need a third: the actual "copyright assignment" >> > form. Personally, I'd look into a foundation for this effort or ask >> > the SPI if they are willing to act as the host for the assignment. I >> > am willing to approach them provided there is consensus on this list. >> > Note that requiring copyright assignment is very useful for the goals >> > of the project (eventually licensing out the work to commercial users) >> > but it does tend to reduce contribution. >> >> >> My thought is we want unofficial (or even official) development forks >> and sandbox clones that take code regardless of assignment, but that >> there's a good policy (and code to validate that 'official' releases >> only use code that's been properly assigned) >> > > Good idea. Basically, a commercial licensee can see that the Official > version has been put under rigorous testing, while they can't be sure of > that for the GPL-only version. But then, they won't want the GPL-only > version anyhow. > > > -- > Timothy Normand Miller, PhD > Assistant Professor of Computer Science, Binghamton University > http://www.cs.binghamton.edu/~millerti/<http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~millerti> > Open Graphics Project > > _______________________________________________ > Open-graphics mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics > List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com) >
_______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
