Re: [Kicad-developers] Library license update.

[Torsten Hüter]

Hi Wayne,

thank you very much for your efforts. I'm guessing that this is not an easy 
topic and takes thus more time. 
Hopefully a good solution can be found this way.

Maybe it makes then sense to announce this change on the KiCad homepage, I 
could also imagine to add a definition of the "audience" - just like on the 
FreeCad homepage. 

Quote from http://www.freecadweb.org/:

"[..] 
Who is FreeCAD for? A couple of user cases:
The home user/hobbyist. 
Got yourself a project you want to build, have built, or 3D printed? Model it 
in FreeCAD. No previous CAD experience required. Our community will help you 
get the hang of it quickly!

The experienced CAD user. 
If you use commercial CAD or BIM modeling software at work, you will find 
similar tools and workflow among the many 
workbenches[http://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/?title=Workbenches] of FreeCAD. 
[..]"

Thanks,
Torsten

>I just wanted to give everyone a heads up that I did not forget about
>our library license issue.  I sent a modified version of the gEDA symbol
>library (GPL font exception) to the FSF for comment on November 20.  I
>received a reply that they are looking at and will get back to me.  I'm
>not sure what is taking so long but as I'm not a lawyer, I would rather
>get some feedback before making it public.  As soon as I hear back from
>the FSF and we have an acceptable license, I will forward the license to
>the library and website devs.  Who knows, if I did a good enough job,
>maybe I can start my second career as lawyer. 

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library license update.

[Wayne Stambaugh]

On 12/15/2015 5:13 PM, "Torsten Hüter" wrote:
> 
> Hi Wayne,
> 
> thank you very much for your efforts. I'm guessing that this is not an easy 
> topic and takes thus more time. 
> Hopefully a good solution can be found this way.

As soon as I hear back from the FSF, I will forward the license to the
website devs for inclusion on our website and as part of the library repo.

> 
> Maybe it makes then sense to announce this change on the KiCad homepage, I 
> could also imagine to add a definition of the "audience" - just like on the 
> FreeCad homepage. 
> 
> Quote from http://www.freecadweb.org/:
> 
> "[..] 
> Who is FreeCAD for? A couple of user cases:
> The home user/hobbyist. 
> Got yourself a project you want to build, have built, or 3D printed? Model it 
> in FreeCAD. No previous CAD experience required. Our community will help you 
> get the hang of it quickly!
> 
> The experienced CAD user. 
> If you use commercial CAD or BIM modeling software at work, you will find 
> similar tools and workflow among the many 
> workbenches[http://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/?title=Workbenches] of FreeCAD. 
> [..]"
> 
> Thanks,
> Torsten
> 
>> I just wanted to give everyone a heads up that I did not forget about
>> our library license issue.  I sent a modified version of the gEDA symbol
>> library (GPL font exception) to the FSF for comment on November 20.  I
>> received a reply that they are looking at and will get back to me.  I'm
>> not sure what is taking so long but as I'm not a lawyer, I would rather
>> get some feedback before making it public.  As soon as I hear back from
>> the FSF and we have an acceptable license, I will forward the license to
>> the library and website devs.  Who knows, if I did a good enough job,
>> maybe I can start my second career as lawyer. 
> 
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library license update.

[Adam Wolf]

Thanks for wrangling this, Wayne!

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Wayne Stambaugh 
wrote:

> I just wanted to give everyone a heads up that I did not forget about
> our library license issue.  I sent a modified version of the gEDA symbol
> library (GPL font exception) to the FSF for comment on November 20.  I
> received a reply that they are looking at and will get back to me.  I'm
> not sure what is taking so long but as I'm not a lawyer, I would rather
> get some feedback before making it public.  As soon as I hear back from
> the FSF and we have an acceptable license, I will forward the license to
> the library and website devs.  Who knows, if I did a good enough job,
> maybe I can start my second career as lawyer. ;)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Wayne
>
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Brian F. G. Bidulock]

Opendous,

Really open person Opendous Support wrote:(Sun, 25 Mar 2012 
00:24:10)
 [components] --A--  [KiCad board file]  --B--  [pcb hardware]
 The point is that you cannot restrict A, B, C or D with copyright.
 
   Ah, thank you!  You have now clearly defined the core concern: A.
 
   Altium is a well lawyered-up EDA company and if you read their EULA
 they seem to believe they can restrict any file created with their
 software.  According to them, any file you create with Altium Designer
 is _licensed_ to you, not owned by you.  Note this has nothing to do
 with circuit ideas and functional designs which cannot be copyrighted.
 http://www.altium.com/products/eula.cfm

My favorite section of that document is 1.10: Intellectual Property
Rights means patent, copyright, design right (whether registered or
unregistered), trademarks (whether registered or common law), trade
secrets, confidential information and any other form of intellectual
property rights.  -- particularly this last circular definition
at the end where intellectual property rights are defined as including
any other form of intellectual property rights.

Where copyright cannot apply, lawyers always fall on confidential
information (tied up with NDAs) and trade secrets as a way of attempting
to constrain what cannot be covered under copyright, trademark or
patent.  ATT led the way on this with UNIX.

Looking at an EULA like this, one would be an utter idiot to agree
to spend $6000 a copy under these absurd restrictions.

 
   Exclusive rights to the useful art ... [is] only available by patent.
   The description itself [is] protectable by copyright.
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Selden#Holding

The last part is questionable too.  Where the description itself is
nothing but a simple description of function (such as is a Gerber file),
there is no copyright protection for it either, even in France and Spain
because no author has impressed his personality on the works, and in
the US because no sweat of the brow was required to cast it so.
Evidence of this?  Have you ever seen a copyright statement in a Gerber
file?  Why is there no place for one in the definintion of the file
format?

In no case does copyright protection for an original work of
 authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system,
 method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery,
 regardless of the form in which it is described, explained,
 illustrated, or embodied in such a work. 17.102(b).

http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW#Licenses_and_Hardware

   I like hauptmech's idea to wait for SWEET to be finished, add a
 License field, then create an online repository.

I suggest the use of one of the open hardware licenses (TAPR or CERN
OHL) to address components or modules contributed to a library: then it
would be more difficult for someone to encumber the library with patents
and other claims by contributing patent or otherwise-encumbered material
to it.  See:

http://www.tapr.org/ohl.html
http://www.ohwr.org/projects/cernohl/wiki

Another way is to not allow anonymous submissions.

--brian

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock   � The reasonable man adapts himself to the �
bidul...@dallas.net� world; the unreasonable one persists in  �
   � trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. �
   � Therefore  all  progress  depends on the �
   � unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw �

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Dick Hollenbeck]

On 03/24/2012 04:13 PM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
 Dick,

 The point is that you cannot restrict A, B, C or D with copyright.

 --brian

Much becomes possible when there is a contract in place.

That entails agreement, consideration, and terms and conditions.

[oops, and usually lawyers.]

Dick


 On Sat, 24 Mar 2012, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:

 [components] --A--  [KiCad board file]  --B--  [pcb hardware]

 [components] --C--  [Commercial software board file]


 Seems we have universal agreement that we are not trying to restrict A or B.

 [pcb hardware]  --D-- [pcb hardware]


 There is some question as to whether anyone can restrict copying of 
 hardware, D.

 C remains a concern.

  

 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Fabrizio Tappero]

Brian,

On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidul...@openss7.org wrote:
 Karl,

 On Fri, 23 Mar 2012, Karl Schmidt wrote:

 There is a very easy solution to all this - use the LGPL for anything
 that gets distributed with kicad and don't think or talk about it any
 more. - Ever.

 An LGPL work distributed and intended only to work with a GPL work is
 derivative of the GPL work (according to the license's own definitions)
 and the entirety is therefore subject to the GPL.

This is not an easy statement to read (for me) but it does not seem
true, kicad lib components is not a kicad derivative work. Why
couldn't  lib components be distributed under a difference licence?


 So, why fool anyone into thinking that LGPL applies to anything in Kicad?

not sure what you mean.


 Besides, what do you care?  Copyright certainly does not apply to printed
 circuit boards or designs in the US...

not sure what you mean or not sure whether anybody's country of
citizenship is relevant here.


cheers
Fabrizio

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Dick Hollenbeck]

[components] --A--  [KiCad board file]  --B--  [pcb hardware]

[components] --C--  [Commercial software board file]


Seems we have universal agreement that we are not trying to restrict A or B.

[pcb hardware]  --D-- [pcb hardware]


There is some question as to whether anyone can restrict copying of hardware, D.

C remains a concern.

 

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Brian F. G. Bidulock]

Dick,

The point is that you cannot restrict A, B, C or D with copyright.

--brian

On Sat, 24 Mar 2012, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:

 [components] --A--  [KiCad board file]  --B--  [pcb hardware]
 
 [components] --C--  [Commercial software board file]
 
 
 Seems we have universal agreement that we are not trying to restrict A or B.
 
 [pcb hardware]  --D-- [pcb hardware]
 
 
 There is some question as to whether anyone can restrict copying of hardware, 
 D.
 
 C remains a concern.
 
  
 
 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock� The reasonable man adapts himself to the �
bidul...@openss7.org� world; the unreasonable one persists in  �
http://www.openss7.org/ � trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. �
� Therefore  all  progress  depends on the �
� unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw �

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Opendous Support]

My point of view is not firm yet, other than that I know I am not a communist.
I don't ever see communism working, no where, no how.
So if what we have is communism, this explains why there
are no significant parts in our libraries.

  Having attempted to contribute I think it is mostly due to the
hassle of using LaunchPad.  Switching to the Yahoo Mailing List and
having a procedure for contributing via an email message would be a
simple solution.

  I don't see Open Source as a commune.  The best definition of Open
Source I have heard is that it is the cooperation of entities on
non-core aspects of their business.  As an example, Facebook has
started an Open Data Center initiative while Google turns the lights
out in collocation facilities to make sure competitors don't even see
their servers.  Yet, Google widely participates in Open Source.  They
each protect their core business but gain by cooperating on non-core
projects.
http://opencompute.org/
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/03/google-miner-helmet/

  If schematic symbols and footprints could be easily contributed,
searched, and organised then the libraries would grow.  From this
thread it seems a consensus is growing that libraries are
Copyrightable and should be Public Domain to avoid issues.

This is off topic, but the only way I can imagine having a reliable
library is an online server where users could up/download schematics
and modules directly from kicad and others could leave feedback
about the accuracy.

  It is on topic:

We do have pending opportunities to formulate a strategy.
So I think a plodding dialog is harmless and good.

  This thread has moved to discussing library issues in general and
easy upload+search is the biggest problem.

  I imagine something like Thingiverse.com for KiCad library elements.
 What would be needed?  Anyone think such a site could support itself
through ads or donations?  How quick and easy would it be to create an
automatic preview generator (in Javascript since most hosting services
don't allow native code)?  How does Drupal7+Fivestar+IMCE sound?
http://drupal.org/project/drupal
http://drupal.org/project/fivestar
http://drupal.org/project/imce

User contributed content could be extracted from this online
database for use in Kicad, provided it is public domain and follows
certain guidelines, which should be defined for a concise module
and library resource.

  The lower the barrier to entry the better.  The submission procedure
instructions and guidelines should be no more than one paragraph.  A
voting system could then be used to grade the submissions.  Picture
comments could be added whenever someone successfully uses a library
element in a project.

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Solonen Vesa]

 So if what we have is communism, this explains why there are no significant 
 parts in our
 libraries.  My earlier remarks are NOT a knock on those who signed up to 
 improve our
 libraries.  It is just a recognition that communism does not work.

 Dick

Well, I think they (communists) tried to solve too large set of problems in one 
go. Capitalism created a nice or not so nice set of limits which problem 
solvers needed to follow... I certainly see the same effect in KiCad. There is 
so much to do to satisfy everyone's needs that the problem seems impossible to 
solve. From my view the priorities are new file formats, libraries and graphics 
(KiCad-GAL). Only bug fixing in between.

Regarding libraries, the discussion few years ago got to a point that library 
team is ready to proceed, but needs to postpone their enthusiasm until new 
file formats are defined and some tools updated. I guess we are still there, 
but way closer to the goal thanks to you. Library license should be as liberal 
as possible, but I'm not sure about CC0 as someone will do a commercial rip off 
as soon as it gets good enough. I don't see that as a big problem to worry 
about though. One has to be able to endure some unfairness so survive...

-Vesa
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Fabrizio Tappero]

Hello,
Element, I actually would like to add a commend on this second last
point (a component database). If we talk about kicad-only component
database, the contribution in making this component database grow will
only come from Kicad people. Instead if such a database had magic
conversion tools that automatically create kicad, eagle, geda, etc.
component parts, contribution would come from way more people.

Additionally, I think it is fundamental for kicad to have some sort of
automatic mechanism to import in the background components from this
database (like wget or similar).

cheers
Fabrizio


On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:20 AM, Element Green
jgr...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
 Just wanted to throw in my 2 cents, from someone who is all *too* familiar
 with these types of discussions.

 * Libraries and modules distributed with Kicad should be public domain for
 maximum flexibility.  I would assume Kicad is meant to be used in a
 commercial environment and I'd hate to have to create all my own libraries
 for things as trivial as power pins.  Enforcing public domain for the
 library/module content distributed with the program, I would think encourage
 more participation from anyone using Kicad in a commercial context (who
 would want to contribute content to a body of work they can't even
 effectively utilize?).

 * An online sharing database of libraries/footprints would be awesome.
  Licensing in this case could be flexible and definable by the author,
 though I would think public domain should be encouraged.  I also spend a
 large amount of my own time creating footprints and libraries, due to lack
 or difficulty finding quality content.  If there was such a concise easy to
 contribute to database, I would happily contribute to it.

 * User contributed content could be extracted from this online database for
 use in Kicad, provided it is public domain and follows certain guidelines,
 which should be defined for a concise module and library resource.

 This last item is pretty important in order to keep Kicad libraries and
 modules consistent and the most generally usable in situations.  I often end
 up creating my own libraries and footprints because of issues with the ones
 distributed with Kicad.  Some guidelines and organization is needed to
 really make it more useful.

 Again, just some common sense from someone standing on the sidelines of
 Kicad development.

 Best regards,

 Element Green


 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to     : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Fabrizio Tappero]

Hello Dick,

I think lib components should be licensed LGPL and (just to make
everybody sleep well) it could be stated somewhere that ANY derivative
schematics and PCB will be licensed independently and according to
what the kicad user (the schematic/pcb creator) wants.

for lib component CC0 is also a good option but that is probably only
because I fundamentally am an pseudo-anarchist.

this is my 2C on this topic.
fab.


On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com wrote:
 On 03/22/2012 10:06 AM, Fabrizio Tappero wrote:
 Hello,
 if we look at what the GEDA guys do/did, I seem to understand that
 they licensed everything (software and libraries) under GNU GPL:
 https://github.com/bert/gschem-symbols

 Word-processor templates for open-source word processors are
 open-source tools like LibreOffice could be distributed under GPL
 without your final word-processor document having to be open source.

 Library components for an EDA software tool can represent (and often
 are) a great value and lots of work is often behind it. Such value
 makes it is worth protecting the libs with a proper license.


 Fabrizio,


 You seem to feel a proper license protect the libraries.  Can you elaborate 
 on how you
 think this is beneficial to both:

 a) users of libraries.

 b) contributors of library parts/footprints

 I am interested in your point of view.


 My point of view is not firm yet, other than that I know I am not a 
 communist.  I don't
 ever see communism working, no where, no how.

 So if what we have is communism, this explains why there are no significant 
 parts in our
 libraries.  My earlier remarks are NOT a knock on those who signed up to 
 improve our
 libraries.  It is just a recognition that communism does not work.

 Somebody has to design a better *process* for sharing parts/footprints.


 I think this means somebody makes money doing it.  You don't like this idea?  
 Then suggest
 one that actually might work.  What we have is clearly NOT working.

 Anybody file that wxformbuilder bug report yet?

 Dick



 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to     : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Karl Schmidt]

There is a very easy solution to all this - use the LGPL for anything that gets distributed with 
kicad and don't think or talk about it any more. - Ever.


Here is why - no single symbol or footprint design would be protected in court in the real world 
other than if the whole body of work (the complete libraries) were lifted.  The use in a design is 
derivative work thus free to be used.


In the mean time this thread is distracting from activities that would actually advance kicad. Non 
of us will get the time wasted thinking about this back at the end of our lives.  If I can spend the 
rest of my life without having to talk to another lawyer about IP property, I would consider that a 
great victory.


Don't get stuck in the tar trap. It is a 'motivational energy sink'.  No good will come of it. It is 
like a cheating girl friend - just move on - don't look back.  Or Cancer - cut it  off and live 
life. Don't let this steal your time...




--

Karl Schmidt  EMail k...@xtronics.com
Transtronics, Inc.  WEB http://xtronics.com
3209 West 9th Street Ph (785) 841-3089
Lawrence, KS 66049  FAX (785) 841-0434

History may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme a lot. -Mark Twain



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Element Green]

On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Fabrizio Tappero 
fabrizio.tapp...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello,
 Element, I actually would like to add a commend on this second last
 point (a component database). If we talk about kicad-only component
 database, the contribution in making this component database grow will
 only come from Kicad people. Instead if such a database had magic
 conversion tools that automatically create kicad, eagle, geda, etc.
 component parts, contribution would come from way more people.

 Additionally, I think it is fundamental for kicad to have some sort of
 automatic mechanism to import in the background components from this
 database (like wget or similar).

 cheers
 Fabrizio


Definitely good ideas.  It would be nice if there was some open standard
that would catch on with manufacturers for releasing footprints and library
symbols.  Seems like SWEET has the potential to become this, from my
limited knowledge of it.  Providing automatic conversion would help too.
 In regards to the ability to import data from within Kicad, it would be
great if the library/footprint browsers supported browsing through data
without having to add them individually to the library preferences.  If
Kicad could index entire directory trees of libraries/modules for browsing
(like a music library application for example) and still offer a way to
limit data to a smaller project subset for other operations (to prevent
overwhelm), that would be going in the direction of browsing online
databases.  Seems like additional categorization of individual footprints
and library symbols would be needed to really make it useful (rather than
relying on what file a particular component resides).  Footprints/symbols
should probably also be treated individually in this context rather than
grouping many in a single file.  If Kicad had this sort of library/module
indexing support, then the initial implementation of the online database
could simply be a bzr repository or similar which gets synchronized locally.

Best regards,
Element
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Dick Hollenbeck]

 Let me make a more general comment: I think this may be different in
 different countries. Plus, depending on the country, the authorities
 may or may not accept there is no international copyright protection
 on PCBs when someone sues someone else about violating some license
 with the help of kicad.

 So what I am saying is we should mention countries along with such
 statements, and before starting a re-licensing process, try and find
 out in which countries people would benefit from it.

 As you can see from my vagueness, I'm not really deep into the
 legalese. But from my understanding, the GPL does not enforce anyone
 to license their work under GPL if they are merely using the library
 (as in using it in a schematic/board, similar to linking a code
 library together with their program) but this is enforced if they are
 doing work based on the library (as in distributing another library
 using footprints from the GPLed library)

 I don't know if this clears anything up or further muddies the waters,
 but I hope for the first,

 Heiko


Only because this concept extends beyond our few library symbols, I take the 
time to state
my understanding of the effectiveness of the GPL:


The GPL requires little in the way of copyright law to support it, since once 
ownership is
established, then this GPL license is basically a terms of use contract.

(Think shrink wrap license, which is a *contract* between two parties, owner 
and user,
licensor and licensee.)

State laws can trump terms and conditions in a contract, but they need to be 
present to do
this.

The strength of the GPL comes not from underlying copyright law so much, as it 
comes from
simple contract law.   That is, you only get to use the software under certain 
terms,
otherwise do not use it.   Now to fully confuse some:   some of the terms of 
use involve
how and when you can make copies.   But again, this is mostly a terms of use 
contract, not
so much to do with a need to have a unified copyright law across all worldwide 
states.

IANAL

My understanding from 30 years of owning a software company.




___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Brian F. G. Bidulock]

Karl,

On Fri, 23 Mar 2012, Karl Schmidt wrote:

 There is a very easy solution to all this - use the LGPL for anything 
 that gets distributed with kicad and don't think or talk about it any 
 more. - Ever.

An LGPL work distributed and intended only to work with a GPL work is
derivative of the GPL work (according to the license's own definitions)
and the entirety is therefore subject to the GPL.

So, why fool anyone into thinking that LGPL applies to anything in Kicad?

Besides, what do you care?  Copyright certainly does not apply to printed
circuit boards or designs in the US...

--brian

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock� The reasonable man adapts himself to the �
bidul...@openss7.org� world; the unreasonable one persists in  �
http://www.openss7.org/ � trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. �
� Therefore  all  progress  depends on the �
� unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw �

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Kenta Yonekura]

Thank you all for contribute to this discussion.

Yesterday, I searched a local law (Japan) for a board design,
and finally I know that board designs are not protected by copyright
(as brian says).

Then, what's the meaning of library license?
How we use the licensed library in our own project? (like GPL, LGPL, BSD, CC...)
We have to write the text of the license on the board? or include the
text in a same package with the board?

I want to use KiCad completely honesty.


We are all developers and have much knowledge about open source. But
this discussion is still difficult..
The library is not for developers but for USERS. All of KiCad USERS
are not developers. I think there are many guys who are not familiar
with open source. So my opinion is same as Element's.

 Libraries and modules distributed with Kicad should be public domain for 
 maximum flexibility.

I think only the KiCad default library should be released under public
domain for ease of use for everyone.
Of course, other third party's library should be released their own license.


--
Kenta


On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidul...@openss7.org wrote:
 Karl,

 On Fri, 23 Mar 2012, Karl Schmidt wrote:

 There is a very easy solution to all this - use the LGPL for anything
 that gets distributed with kicad and don't think or talk about it any
 more. - Ever.

 An LGPL work distributed and intended only to work with a GPL work is
 derivative of the GPL work (according to the license's own definitions)
 and the entirety is therefore subject to the GPL.

 So, why fool anyone into thinking that LGPL applies to anything in Kicad?

 Besides, what do you care?  Copyright certainly does not apply to printed
 circuit boards or designs in the US...

 --brian

 --
 Brian F. G. Bidulock    ¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦
 bidul...@openss7.org    ¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in  ¦
 http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. ¦
                        ¦ Therefore  all  progress  depends on the ¦
                        ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦


 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to     : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo]

I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has
authorship, and it makes it have copyright.

I understand that for the footprints, and for the schematic symbols,
they will mostly come from IPC/JEDEC or
the datasheet. But even in the work of creating symbol libraries it's
always a little artistic part, which may be
covered under copyright. (For example Spanish law covers for
derivative works -like translations, etc-, in the
end we're translating from datasheet to kicad..., -you know law isn't
black or white, but gray- )

So, I'm my opinion it's not that easy.

I think that something interesting could be including a field in the
libraries with the license model the author gave it,
and encourage the use of licenses as open as possible (if we want the
widest adoption for kicad).


Cheers,
Mike

2012/3/21 Brian F. G. Bidulock bidul...@openss7.org:
 Heiko,

 Footprints are not subject to copyright either.  They are not
 creative: (if they are any good) they are simple data gathered
 from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources.  The same applies to
 standard symbols used in a schematic library.

 It's not worth worrying about: really.

 --brian

 On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Heiko Rosemann wrote:

 Let me make a more general comment: I think this may be different in
 different countries. Plus, depending on the country, the authorities
 may or may not accept there is no international copyright protection
 on PCBs when someone sues someone else about violating some license
 with the help of kicad.

 So what I am saying is we should mention countries along with such
 statements, and before starting a re-licensing process, try and find
 out in which countries people would benefit from it.

 As you can see from my vagueness, I'm not really deep into the
 legalese. But from my understanding, the GPL does not enforce anyone
 to license their work under GPL if they are merely using the library
 (as in using it in a schematic/board, similar to linking a code
 library together with their program) but this is enforced if they are
 doing work based on the library (as in distributing another library
 using footprints from the GPLed library)

 I don't know if this clears anything up or further muddies the waters,
 but I hope for the first,


 --
 Brian F. G. Bidulock    ¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦
 bidul...@openss7.org    ¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in  ¦
 http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. ¦
                        ¦ Therefore  all  progress  depends on the ¦
                        ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦


 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to     : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp




-- 

Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
http://www.nbee.es
+34 636 52 25 69
skype: ajoajoajo

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Opendous Support]

Footprints are not subject to copyright either.
They are not creative: ... they are simple data
gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources.

  Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas,
and not the ideas themselves.  For example, if you take a photograph
of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright
owner of the photograph.  Your original expression is the overexposed
and blurry image.  In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own
the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own
the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your
design.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine

  Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be
Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the
definition, not the circuit itself.  In other words, someone can redo
your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the
Copyright owners of that work.
http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF
http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml
http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW

I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed
by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright.

  That is the most sensible attitude.

It's not worth worrying about: really.

  Why risk it.  Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade
use of KiCad should be avoided.  I would be willing to donate all my
library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative
Commons Public Domain Dedication:
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

  If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted
simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic
symbols and module footprints.  I'm sure many users would be willing
to help out and contribute.  As noted earlier, it is the expression of
an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of
redoing the work.

-Matt

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidul...@openss7.org wrote:
 Miguel,

 On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote:

 I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has
 authorship, and it makes it have copyright.

 Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

 --brian

 --
 Brian F. G. Bidulock    ¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦
 bidul...@openss7.org    ¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in  ¦
 http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. ¦
                        ¦ Therefore  all  progress  depends on the ¦
                        ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦


 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to     : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Martin]

I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is 
OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the 
OpenSource ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal 
impact to the future of this wonderful software.


Stop this thread, please!

Martin

Dne 22.3.2012 12:38, Opendous Support napsal(a):

Footprints are not subject to copyright either.
They are not creative: ... they are simple data
gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources.


   Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas,
and not the ideas themselves.  For example, if you take a photograph
of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright
owner of the photograph.  Your original expression is the overexposed
and blurry image.  In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own
the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own
the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your
design.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine

   Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be
Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the
definition, not the circuit itself.  In other words, someone can redo
your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the
Copyright owners of that work.
http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF
http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml
http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW


I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed
by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright.


   That is the most sensible attitude.


It's not worth worrying about: really.


   Why risk it.  Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade
use of KiCad should be avoided.  I would be willing to donate all my
library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative
Commons Public Domain Dedication:
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

   If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted
simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic
symbols and module footprints.  I'm sure many users would be willing
to help out and contribute.  As noted earlier, it is the expression of
an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of
redoing the work.

-Matt

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidul...@openss7.org  wrote:

Miguel,

On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote:


I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has
authorship, and it makes it have copyright.


Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

--brian

--
Brian F. G. Bidulock¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦
bidul...@openss7.org¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in  ¦
http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. ¦
¦ Therefore  all  progress  depends on the ¦
¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Martin]

Of course I meant licenses other than GPL or Creative Commons. Many of 
us are badly affected by the nasty things about ACTA


Martin

Dne 22.3.2012 13:49, Martijn Kuipers napsal(a):


On Mar 22, 2012, at 1:32 PM, Martin wrote:


I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is 
OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the OpenSource 
ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal impact to the 
future of this wonderful software.


GPL works because of copyright.


Stop this thread, please!


Ostrich Politics is not the solution. Avoiding license problems on libraries 
may be best tackled with a Creative Commons alike license, but I am not a 
lawyer.
In fact, if the main developers agree, next time we add a 
symbol/footprint/part/documentation we could provide it under Creative Commons.

/Martijn




Martin

Dne 22.3.2012 12:38, Opendous Support napsal(a):

Footprints are not subject to copyright either.
They are not creative: ... they are simple data
gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources.


   Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas,
and not the ideas themselves.  For example, if you take a photograph
of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright
owner of the photograph.  Your original expression is the overexposed
and blurry image.  In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own
the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own
the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your
design.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine

   Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be
Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the
definition, not the circuit itself.  In other words, someone can redo
your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the
Copyright owners of that work.
http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF
http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml
http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW


I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed
by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright.


   That is the most sensible attitude.


It's not worth worrying about: really.


   Why risk it.  Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade
use of KiCad should be avoided.  I would be willing to donate all my
library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative
Commons Public Domain Dedication:
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

   If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted
simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic
symbols and module footprints.  I'm sure many users would be willing
to help out and contribute.  As noted earlier, it is the expression of
an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of
redoing the work.

-Matt

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidul...@openss7.org   wrote:

Miguel,

On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote:


I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has
authorship, and it makes it have copyright.


Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

--brian

--
Brian F. G. Bidulock¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦
bidul...@openss7.org¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in  ¦
http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. ¦
¦ Therefore  all  progress  depends on the ¦
¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Dick Hollenbeck]

On 03/22/2012 07:32 AM, Martin wrote:
 I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is 
 OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the 
 OpenSource ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal 
 impact to the future of this wonderful software.

 Stop this thread, please!

 Martin

Hell no.

Go away fool.  (In five years I have never called anyone a fool.)

Without copyright law you have no GPL.

This is an important thread and I want it to continue.


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo]

In fact, I think that GPL is a bad license for the libraries kicad
libraries,  (authorship details appart...),

In my opinion:

* GPL is perfect for all the *sourcecode of KiCad*, and that must be keept
like that.

* GPL license is bad for the* library parts or footprints* (at least LGPL
or some kind of CC must be the minimum here).



Why?, source code of project, completely open must be perfect for anyone,
what we want is KiCad to go forward in development and features.

But having so restrictive licenses like GPL in the preinstalled footprint
or libraries could be a entrance barrier for many companies to use KiCad,
and I think
we all want many companies to use kicad, and if possible, put some effort
in development, like Dick is doing from softplc, or I'm doing (just a
little) from Nbee.


So, why put entry barriers to KiCad growth if we can easily avoid it? :)





2012/3/22 Martin mar...@ok1rr.com:
 Of course I meant licenses other than GPL or Creative Commons. Many of us
 are badly affected by the nasty things about ACTA

 Martin

 Dne 22.3.2012 13:49, Martijn Kuipers napsal(a):


 On Mar 22, 2012, at 1:32 PM, Martin wrote:

 I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is
 OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the
 OpenSource ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal
 impact to the future of this wonderful software.


 GPL works because of copyright.

 Stop this thread, please!


 Ostrich Politics is not the solution. Avoiding license problems on
 libraries may be best tackled with a Creative Commons alike license, but
I
 am not a lawyer.
 In fact, if the main developers agree, next time we add a
 symbol/footprint/part/documentation we could provide it under Creative
 Commons.

 /Martijn



 Martin

 Dne 22.3.2012 12:38, Opendous Support napsal(a):

 Footprints are not subject to copyright either.
 They are not creative: ... they are simple data
 gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources.


   Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas,
 and not the ideas themselves.  For example, if you take a photograph
 of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright
 owner of the photograph.  Your original expression is the overexposed
 and blurry image.  In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own
 the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own
 the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your
 design.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine

   Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be
 Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the
 definition, not the circuit itself.  In other words, someone can redo
 your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the
 Copyright owners of that work.


http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF
 http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml
 http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW

 I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed
 by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright.


   That is the most sensible attitude.

 It's not worth worrying about: really.


   Why risk it.  Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade
 use of KiCad should be avoided.  I would be willing to donate all my
 library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative
 Commons Public Domain Dedication:
 http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

   If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted
 simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic
 symbols and module footprints.  I'm sure many users would be willing
 to help out and contribute.  As noted earlier, it is the expression of
 an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of
 redoing the work.

 -Matt

 On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock
 bidul...@openss7.org   wrote:

 Miguel,

 On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote:

 I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has
 authorship, and it makes it have copyright.


 Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

 --brian

 --
 Brian F. G. Bidulock¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦
 bidul...@openss7.org¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in  ¦
 http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. ¦
¦ Therefore  all  progress  depends on the ¦
¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦


 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to : 

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Dick Hollenbeck]

On 03/22/2012 06:38 AM, Opendous Support wrote:
 Footprints are not subject to copyright either.
 They are not creative: ... they are simple data
 gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources.
   Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas,
 and not the ideas themselves.  For example, if you take a photograph
 of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright
 owner of the photograph.  Your original expression is the overexposed
 and blurry image.  In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own
 the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own
 the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your
 design.
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine

   Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be
 Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the
 definition, not the circuit itself.  In other words, someone can redo
 your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the
 Copyright owners of that work.
 http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF
 http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml
 http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW

 I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed
 by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright.
   That is the most sensible attitude.

 It's not worth worrying about: really.
   Why risk it.  Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade
 use of KiCad should be avoided.  I would be willing to donate all my
 library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative
 Commons Public Domain Dedication:
 http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

   If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted
 simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic
 symbols and module footprints.  I'm sure many users would be willing
 to help out and contribute.  As noted earlier, it is the expression of
 an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of
 redoing the work.

 -Matt


Great posting Matt.

We do have pending opportunities to formulate a strategy.  So I think a 
plodding dialog is
harmless and good.   For example, we will be moving to s-expressions for 
schematic and
board stuff (parts, footprints, schematics and boards).

Some interesting questions that I hope will stimulate some thinking, and 
eventually some
responses:


1) What are we to conclude when a conversion program changes the expression 
of an idea
(to s-expressions)?   Sounds not to be a copyright violation during the 
conversion, but an
opportunity to re-establish a specific license or posture on the converted work.

2) Do we want the work invested in KiCad project schematic parts and footprints 
to add
value to KiCad expressly, and not be available for *easy* use in other software 
packages? 
How important is this on a scale of 1-10?

3) What are the incentives for anyone to share their work in parts and 
footprints?  Are
they sufficient?



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Fabrizio Tappero]

Hello,
if we look at what the GEDA guys do/did, I seem to understand that
they licensed everything (software and libraries) under GNU GPL:
https://github.com/bert/gschem-symbols

Word-processor templates for open-source word processors are
open-source tools like LibreOffice could be distributed under GPL
without your final word-processor document having to be open source.

Library components for an EDA software tool can represent (and often
are) a great value and lots of work is often behind it. Such value
makes it is worth protecting the libs with a proper license.

I think we should continue this discussion without getting too excited.

cheers
fabrizio




On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com wrote:
 On 03/22/2012 07:32 AM, Martin wrote:
 I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is
 OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the
 OpenSource ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal
 impact to the future of this wonderful software.

 Stop this thread, please!

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Martin]

There is no universal copyright law accepted worldwide. So what 
copyright law? American, japanese, lesothean? Of course, we know the 
origin of GPL, everybody can read. The copyright law is in many 
countries a set of very stupid rubbish apparently created by 
non-computer people. So, before calling anyone fool you must be 
specific. Do you have a bad day, Dick?


GPL as well as CC are clear and specific, therefore good. I believe a 
footnote about licensing without any further discussion would be 
sufficient. And without fools.


Martin

P.S. I am leaving the list. I don't need to be called a fool.

Dne 22.3.2012 15:19, Dick Hollenbeck napsal(a):

On 03/22/2012 07:32 AM, Martin wrote:

I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is
OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the
OpenSource ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal
impact to the future of this wonderful software.

Stop this thread, please!

Martin


Hell no.

Go away fool.  (In five years I have never called anyone a fool.)

Without copyright law you have no GPL.

This is an important thread and I want it to continue.


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Dick Hollenbeck]

On 03/22/2012 09:20 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote:
 In fact, I think that GPL is a bad license for the libraries kicad libraries,
  (authorship details appart...),

 In my opinion:

 * GPL is perfect for all the *sourcecode of KiCad*, and that must be keept 
 like that.

 * GPL license is bad for the*library parts or footprints* (at least LGPL or 
 some kind of
 CC must be the minimum here).



 Why?, source code of project, completely open must be perfect for anyone, 
 what we want
 is KiCad to go forward in development and features.

 But having so restrictive licenses like GPL in the preinstalled footprint or 
 libraries
 could be a entrance barrier for many companies to use KiCad, and I think
 we all want many companies to use kicad, and if possible, put some effort in
 development, like Dick is doing from softplc, or I'm doing (just a little) 
 from Nbee.


 So, why put entry barriers to KiCad growth if we can easily avoid it? :)


The source code has not been part this discussion.


I think your points are fairly representative of the community.  In fact, I 
thought we
were a little further into our conversation, that we had some slowly evolving 
consensus
that we needed something better than the GPL for the part/footprint 
libraries.  But what
constitutes better?


1) a policy statement is needed, so the concerns of the original poster are 
addressed, who
is representative of the kind of person who does not want barriers.  Brian's 
statement is
an *example* policy statement.


2) as part of that policy statement, we could clarify or change the license, or 
remove it
by going public domain on the parts and footprints.


My questions in the earlier email were intended to figure out what protections, 
if any,
the project needs so we can best deal with need 2) above, and also to 
facilitate a turbo
charging of footprint and part sharing.


3) 1) and 2) may dictate that some procedural changes regarding the 
contribution of parts
and footprints come about.  If new parts coming in are under copyright, (and I 
believe all
new work is), some standing procedure may need to be in place to deal with that 
copyright
on parts and footprints, or demo boards.  Such as signing a contributor 
agreement (again
based on (2) above).  For example, if public domain is the choice, a 
declaration should be
made to that effect.  Otherwise perhaps agreement to the chosen license.  This 
the formal
way to do it.


In my opinion, more important than the tentative adopter of KiCad, is the 
vigorous
recycling and sharing of parts and footprints.  So I do not want to throw the 
baby out
with the bathwater.  I don't think we are any where near optimum on sharing 
parts and
footprints.  This is a far bigger problem and more important than scaring folks 
away with
a vague licensing issue.  In fact, if you solve my concern, you will bring in 
more folks
that way than making them comfortable with the parts/footprints licensing.   
I don't
want the solution to one problem be a disincentive or impediment to another 
opportunity
that we have, which is to turbo charge the sharing.  So let's not do damage 
to a
turbo-charging opportunity.


Market share seems to be what we are after?

Market share makes us what again?   Proud?  Great in the eyes of our children?

I cannot remember, maybe I never knew.


Dick



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Martijn Kuipers]

On Mar 22, 2012, at 3:30 PM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:

 On 03/22/2012 06:38 AM, Opendous Support wrote:
 Footprints are not subject to copyright either.
 They are not creative: ... they are simple data
 gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources.
  Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas,
 and not the ideas themselves.  For example, if you take a photograph
 of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright
 owner of the photograph.  Your original expression is the overexposed
 and blurry image.  In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own
 the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own
 the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your
 design.
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine
 
  Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be
 Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the
 definition, not the circuit itself.  In other words, someone can redo
 your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the
 Copyright owners of that work.
 http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF
 http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml
 http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW
 
 I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed
 by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright.
  That is the most sensible attitude.
 
 It's not worth worrying about: really.
  Why risk it.  Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade
 use of KiCad should be avoided.  I would be willing to donate all my
 library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative
 Commons Public Domain Dedication:
 http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
 
  If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted
 simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic
 symbols and module footprints.  I'm sure many users would be willing
 to help out and contribute.  As noted earlier, it is the expression of
 an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of
 redoing the work.
 
 -Matt
 
 
 Great posting Matt.
 
 We do have pending opportunities to formulate a strategy.  So I think a 
 plodding dialog is
 harmless and good.   For example, we will be moving to s-expressions for 
 schematic and
 board stuff (parts, footprints, schematics and boards).
 
 Some interesting questions that I hope will stimulate some thinking, and 
 eventually some
 responses:
 
 
 1) What are we to conclude when a conversion program changes the expression 
 of an idea
 (to s-expressions)?   Sounds not to be a copyright violation during the 
 conversion, but an
 opportunity to re-establish a specific license or posture on the converted 
 work.
Normally translation (language-wise) are covered under copyright. So I think 
that means that GPL remains GPL, if the GPL can be asserted on symbol/footprint 
libraries.
From reading the opinions in this thread it seems it can be licensed with the 
GPL. Whether or not a schema using a symbol then has to be GPL-ed is something 
which is unclear to me, and I wonder if the answer will be the same for each 
country where KiCad is used.


 2) Do we want the work invested in KiCad project schematic parts and 
 footprints to add
 value to KiCad expressly, and not be available for *easy* use in other 
 software packages? 
 How important is this on a scale of 1-10?
0. I think we should allow other programs to import/convert KiCad libraries. I 
have already seen people switching to Eagle because they feel it has the most 
complete library, even though they could import them.
In my opinion, having a neutral license for parts and footprints is adding 
value to KiCad.


 3) What are the incentives for anyone to share their work in parts and 
 footprints?  Are
 they sufficient?
I think a upload part/footprint to KiCad button or the ability to share your 
libraries with (something like git/bzr) would be an incentive.
This would allow a reseller (adafruit, rs, farnell, etc) to publish the 
parts/footprint in their libraries and you would add their repo as a library 
resource (or clone it).

I think what is stopping people (guilty) from sharing parts and footprints is 
in the ease of submission. 

/Martijn
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Dick Hollenbeck]

 Martin

 P.S. I am leaving the list. I don't need to be called a fool.

Martin,

Coming into our board room and telling the owners that they should not talk 
about
something, a concern raised by a user, obviously did not sit well with me.

I am willing to apologize for my (over) reaction if you are willing to 
apologize.

Dick



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo]

2012/3/22 Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com:
 Market share seems to be what we are after?

 Market share makes us what again?   Proud?  Great in the eyes of our 
 children?

 I cannot remember, maybe I never knew.


More people using KiCad, means more free people, since they won't be
tied to proprietary closed formats.

For example, I have many designs in my company that I wish I could
open, but, for what?, they can only be opened with Altium, so the
comunity could not make any use of it they're tied to a
proprietary software, that costs $6000.




-- 

Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
http://www.nbee.es
+34 636 52 25 69
skype: ajoajoajo

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Dick Hollenbeck]

On 03/22/2012 10:06 AM, Fabrizio Tappero wrote:
 Hello,
 if we look at what the GEDA guys do/did, I seem to understand that
 they licensed everything (software and libraries) under GNU GPL:
 https://github.com/bert/gschem-symbols

 Word-processor templates for open-source word processors are
 open-source tools like LibreOffice could be distributed under GPL
 without your final word-processor document having to be open source.

 Library components for an EDA software tool can represent (and often
 are) a great value and lots of work is often behind it. Such value
 makes it is worth protecting the libs with a proper license.

 I think we should continue this discussion without getting too excited.

I agree.
 cheers
 fabrizio


Let me simply point out that:

1) in 5 years, even with its own repo, its own mailing list, and its own team, 
I am not
aware of any significant impact on the KiCad libraries from contributors.

2) 9 times out of 10, when I have to use a symbol, I have to make my own.


Anything is better than this, including:

a) deleting the KiCad library altogether from our project, thusly forming a 
need that can
be fulfilled by a business or team according to its own charter, maybe a 
subscription
service.  I spend half my time in KiCad developing parts and footprint, at 
least.  This is
money.  Because when I am not doing it, I'm paying somebody else to do it.

b) farting in the wind.





___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[lajos kamocsay]

This discussion about the library license is a really interesting
topic, made me think all day.

I just want to put this out there first, so you know where I'm coming
from: when I contribute code or content to an open source project, I
mostly just want to share something I made, that I find useful, and
hope that it would help or save someone else time. But getting credit
is nice.

Do I need to retain copyright? A quick excerpt from wikipedia:

Copyright is a legal concept, enacted by most governments, giving
the creator of an original work exclusive rights to it, usually for a
limited time. Generally, it is the right to copy, but also gives the
copyright holder the right to be credited for the work, to determine
who may adapt the work to other forms, who may perform the work, who
may financially benefit from it, and other related rights.

This seems too restrictive, unless I also state that while I retain
copyright, I allow anyone to use it for any purpose, personal or
business.

Creative Commons seems to be a license that does something similar,
but whoever uses the content must give credit to the copyright holder.
How would Kicad enforce that? Create a credits file in the directory
for the 25 parts and modules I used, or would it have to print the
credits on all schematics, or maybe even on all produced PCBs?

I think finding the right licensing is tricky, and possibly would
require the help of an ip lawyer.

One example I liked was the library license from adafruit. From her website:

Its released into the Public Domain - that means you can do
whatever you want. We'd like it if you kept the author email/url in
the part description, just so we can be alerted if there are errors.

I think something like that would work for me.

I'm not a lawyer, so please take all this only as food for thought.


Thanks-
-lajos


On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
miguelan...@nbee.es wrote:
 2012/3/22 Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com:
 Market share seems to be what we are after?

 Market share makes us what again?   Proud?  Great in the eyes of our 
 children?

 I cannot remember, maybe I never knew.


 More people using KiCad, means more free people, since they won't be
 tied to proprietary closed formats.

 For example, I have many designs in my company that I wish I could
 open, but, for what?, they can only be opened with Altium, so the
 comunity could not make any use of it they're tied to a
 proprietary software, that costs $6000.




 --

 Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
 http://www.nbee.es
 +34 636 52 25 69
 skype: ajoajoajo

 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to     : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Dick Hollenbeck]

On 03/22/2012 10:06 AM, Fabrizio Tappero wrote:
 Hello,
 if we look at what the GEDA guys do/did, I seem to understand that
 they licensed everything (software and libraries) under GNU GPL:
 https://github.com/bert/gschem-symbols

 Word-processor templates for open-source word processors are
 open-source tools like LibreOffice could be distributed under GPL
 without your final word-processor document having to be open source.

 Library components for an EDA software tool can represent (and often
 are) a great value and lots of work is often behind it. Such value
 makes it is worth protecting the libs with a proper license.


Fabrizio,


You seem to feel a proper license protect the libraries.  Can you elaborate on 
how you
think this is beneficial to both:

a) users of libraries.

b) contributors of library parts/footprints

I am interested in your point of view.


My point of view is not firm yet, other than that I know I am not a communist.  
I don't
ever see communism working, no where, no how.

So if what we have is communism, this explains why there are no significant 
parts in our
libraries.  My earlier remarks are NOT a knock on those who signed up to 
improve our
libraries.  It is just a recognition that communism does not work.

Somebody has to design a better *process* for sharing parts/footprints. 


I think this means somebody makes money doing it.  You don't like this idea?  
Then suggest
one that actually might work.  What we have is clearly NOT working.

Anybody file that wxformbuilder bug report yet?

Dick



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Opendous Support]

  As an example of how lawyered-up EDA companies treat libraries,
refer to section 3.1 and 3.2 of the Altium EULA:
http://www.altium.com/products/eula.cfm

  Their EULA restricts use of libraries to their products.  You cannot
restrict the use of something you do not own so I assume Altium's
lawyers believe they own the copyright to their libraries.  In section
1.14 they seem to be stating that anything a user designs with their
software is licensed to that user, not owned by them, as that would
imply transfer of ownership of Altium's materials.

  None of us are lawyers so let us tread carefully.  I vote for Public
Domain'ing anything KiCad users need to move outside of KiCad.
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

From reading the opinions in this thread it seems it can be licensed with
the GPL.  Whether or not a schema using a symbol then has to be GPL-ed
is something which is unclear to me, and I wonder if the answer will be the
same for each country where KiCad is used.

  Exactly.  It is unclear so why risk it?  From personal experience
there are really only about 50 standard symbols and footprints that
must be included for basic functionality.  This isn't a massive amount
of work to redo if necessary.

having a neutral license for parts and footprints is adding value to KiCad.

  Is that another vote for CC0 (Public Domain)?

1) What are we to conclude when a conversion program
changes the expression of an idea (to s-expressions)?

  I assume copyright is maintained through a format conversion.  If
you copy a movie from VHS to DVD you do not gain copyright of the
work.

2) Do we want the work invested in KiCad project schematic parts and
footprints to add value to KiCad expressly, and not be available for *easy*
use in other software packages? How important is this on a scale of 1-10?

  I say extend the ideals of the GPL throughout KiCad.   No use restrictions.

3) What are the incentives for anyone to share their
work in parts and footprints?  Are they sufficient?

  I have no objection to readily sharing my symbols and footprints
under as loose a licence as possible, such as CC0 (Public Domain).  I
regularly create my own symbols as most parts I use are not standard
and I have a schematic style I try to follow.  I also create my own
footprints to tweak things for either minimal board area or easier
DIY'ability.  However, the symbols and footprints have no value
outside of the design process as far as I can tell.  It is work that
needs to be done but has no value on its own.  Contributing such work
to KiCad at least gets me a shout-out.  I don't see any significant
competitive advantage to not sharing.  In fact, having someone check
my work is an advantage.

  There isn't really much of an incentive to share.  There also isn't
any real incentive not to share.  In an ideal world all IC
manufacturers would create simple text pinout files such as those the
FPGA companies (Xilinx, Altera, Lattice) create for their components.
Users could run such files through custom symbol generators to create
libraries that fit their own style.
http://www.altera.com/literature/dp/cyclone-iv/EP4CE6.txt

a policy statement is needed ...
clarify or change the license ...
[due to above] some procedural changes regarding the contribution of
parts and footprints come about.  If new parts coming in are under copyright,
(and I believe all new work is), some standing procedure may need to be
in place to deal with that copyright on parts, footprints, demos boards.
Such as signing a contributor agreement

  How about a new KiCad mailing list for symbols and footprints?
There could be a simple procedure for posting and a template for how
to assign the work.  This would simplify library contributions vs. the
hassle of Launchpad.

  The Subject line could be LibraryType - License - Name -
Description, e.g., (Footprint - CC0 - SOT223 - SMT 3-Pin) or (Symbol
- GPL - 1117 - 1A LDO).  The library element could be an attachment.
The submitter would have to state in the body of the message that they
are the copyright owner and are licensing accordingly.

I don't think we are any where near optimum on sharing parts and
footprints.  This is a far bigger problem and more important than
scaring folks away with a vague licensing issue ...
if you solve my concern, you will bring in more folks that way than
making them comfortable with the parts/footprints licensing.

  One of the most useful principles of the GPL is that you do not need
anyone's permission to use or create GPL-licensed content.  Does there
exist a simple multi-user, no registration version control system that
would be better than the above mailing list proposal?  Launchpad is
too much of a hassle for the casual user and there needs to be search
facilities.  Unless someone can fund and develop a website such as
Thingiverse.com for KiCad libraries we are stuck piggy-backing on
other services.

Market share seems to be what we are after?

  I'm after usability.  

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[lajos kamocsay]

Totally agree with your point:

 2) 9 times out of 10, when I have to use a symbol, I have to make my own.

Even if I use a module from the library, I have to check it. It's
better to find out in pcbnew if a footprint doesn't match rather than
after etching and drilling a hundred holes. Just the other day I found
that the TO220 module and the schematic didn't match, the Vin and GND
pin numbers were swapped.

This is off topic, but the only way I can imagine having a reliable
library is an online server where users could up/download schematics
and modules directly from kicad and others could leave feedback about
the accuracy.


-lajos


On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com wrote:
 On 03/22/2012 10:06 AM, Fabrizio Tappero wrote:
 Hello,
 if we look at what the GEDA guys do/did, I seem to understand that
 they licensed everything (software and libraries) under GNU GPL:
 https://github.com/bert/gschem-symbols

 Word-processor templates for open-source word processors are
 open-source tools like LibreOffice could be distributed under GPL
 without your final word-processor document having to be open source.

 Library components for an EDA software tool can represent (and often
 are) a great value and lots of work is often behind it. Such value
 makes it is worth protecting the libs with a proper license.

 I think we should continue this discussion without getting too excited.

 I agree.
 cheers
 fabrizio


 Let me simply point out that:

 1) in 5 years, even with its own repo, its own mailing list, and its own 
 team, I am not
 aware of any significant impact on the KiCad libraries from contributors.

 2) 9 times out of 10, when I have to use a symbol, I have to make my own.


 Anything is better than this, including:

 a) deleting the KiCad library altogether from our project, thusly forming a 
 need that can
 be fulfilled by a business or team according to its own charter, maybe a 
 subscription
 service.  I spend half my time in KiCad developing parts and footprint, at 
 least.  This is
 money.  Because when I am not doing it, I'm paying somebody else to do it.

 b) farting in the wind.





 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to     : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Element Green]

Just wanted to throw in my 2 cents, from someone who is all *too* familiar
with these types of discussions.

* Libraries and modules distributed with Kicad should be public domain for
maximum flexibility.  I would assume Kicad is meant to be used in a
commercial environment and I'd hate to have to create all my own libraries
for things as trivial as power pins.  Enforcing public domain for the
library/module content distributed with the program, I would think
encourage more participation from anyone using Kicad in a commercial
context (who would want to contribute content to a body of work they can't
even effectively utilize?).

* An online sharing database of libraries/footprints would be awesome.
 Licensing in this case could be flexible and definable by the author,
though I would think public domain should be encouraged.  I also spend a
large amount of my own time creating footprints and libraries, due to lack
or difficulty finding quality content.  If there was such a concise easy to
contribute to database, I would happily contribute to it.

* User contributed content could be extracted from this online database for
use in Kicad, provided it is public domain and follows certain guidelines,
which should be defined for a concise module and library resource.

This last item is pretty important in order to keep Kicad libraries and
modules consistent and the most generally usable in situations.  I often
end up creating my own libraries and footprints because of issues with the
ones distributed with Kicad.  Some guidelines and organization is needed to
really make it more useful.

Again, just some common sense from someone standing on the sidelines of
Kicad development.

Best regards,

Element Green
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo]

For wider adoption, may be a LGPL / MIT or BSD license would make more sense.

In my opinion the libraries may be license neutral, or public domain.

It would be great if companies started using Kicad for normal
development without
any legal problems.


2012/3/21 Kenta Yonekura mills...@gmail.com:
 Dear All,

 I have a question for KiCad default library.

 Now, it's released under GPLv2.
 http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers/kicad/library/revision/113/COPYRIGHT.txt

 If I make a '.sch', '.brd' or any gerber data using it, my data will
 become GPLed?

 When I checked some files that I made using default library,
 '.sch' file does not contain any datas from default library
 but '.brd' file seems to contain those..
 In this case, as far as I know, '.brd' file is definitely GPLed and
 also '.mod' files that were
 used to make '.brd' file become GPLed. If this '.brd' file is made
 with '.sch' file,
 it's also become GPLed, of course '.lib' files used in 'sch' file become 
 GPLed.
 I don't know whether the gerber data become GPLed or not.

 I want to know how to make gerber datas which were not released under GPL.

 Thanks,
 Kenta

 /**
  *@author Kenta Yonekura
  *@mail mills...@gmail.com
  *@see http://blog.livedoor.jp/k_yon/
  */

 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to     : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



-- 

Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
http://www.nbee.es
+34 636 52 25 69
skype: ajoajoajo

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Brian F. G. Bidulock]

Kenta,

Printed circuit boards and their fabrication inputs and even their
designs are neither subject to nor protected by copyright.  The same
applies for schematics.  GPL2 only addresses copyright, so for board
designs and fabrication outputs you can ignore it.

Ask youself whether you want to use freerouter if your design is
not protected by patent... ;)

--brian

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Kenta Yonekura wrote:

 Dear All,
 
 I have a question for KiCad default library.
 
 Now, it's released under GPLv2.
 http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers/kicad/library/revision/113/COPYRIGHT.txt
 
 If I make a '.sch', '.brd' or any gerber data using it, my data will
 become GPLed?
 
 When I checked some files that I made using default library,
 '.sch' file does not contain any datas from default library
 but '.brd' file seems to contain those..
 In this case, as far as I know, '.brd' file is definitely GPLed and
 also '.mod' files that were
 used to make '.brd' file become GPLed. If this '.brd' file is made
 with '.sch' file,
 it's also become GPLed, of course '.lib' files used in 'sch' file become 
 GPLed.
 I don't know whether the gerber data become GPLed or not.
 
 I want to know how to make gerber datas which were not released under GPL.
 
 Thanks,
 Kenta
 
 /**
  *@author Kenta Yonekura
  *@mail mills...@gmail.com
  *@see http://blog.livedoor.jp/k_yon/
  */
 
 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock� The reasonable man adapts himself to the �
bidul...@openss7.org� world; the unreasonable one persists in  �
http://www.openss7.org/ � trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. �
� Therefore  all  progress  depends on the �
� unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw �

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Brian F. G. Bidulock]

Miguel,

Printed circuit board designs are not protected under copyright.

--brian

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote:

 For wider adoption, may be a LGPL / MIT or BSD license would make more sense.
 
 In my opinion the libraries may be license neutral, or public domain.
 
 It would be great if companies started using Kicad for normal
 development without
 any legal problems.
 
 
 2012/3/21 Kenta Yonekura mills...@gmail.com:
  Dear All,
 
  I have a question for KiCad default library.
 
  Now, it's released under GPLv2.
  http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers/kicad/library/revision/113/COPYRIGHT.txt
 
  If I make a '.sch', '.brd' or any gerber data using it, my data will
  become GPLed?
 
  When I checked some files that I made using default library,
  '.sch' file does not contain any datas from default library
  but '.brd' file seems to contain those..
  In this case, as far as I know, '.brd' file is definitely GPLed and
  also '.mod' files that were
  used to make '.brd' file become GPLed. If this '.brd' file is made
  with '.sch' file,
  it's also become GPLed, of course '.lib' files used in 'sch' file become 
  GPLed.
  I don't know whether the gerber data become GPLed or not.
 
  I want to know how to make gerber datas which were not released under GPL.
 
  Thanks,
  Kenta
 
  /**
   *@author Kenta Yonekura
   *@mail mills...@gmail.com
   *@see http://blog.livedoor.jp/k_yon/
   */
 
  ___
  Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
  Post to     : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
  Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
  More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
 
 
 
 -- 
 
 Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
 http://www.nbee.es
 +34 636 52 25 69
 skype: ajoajoajo
 
 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock� The reasonable man adapts himself to the �
bidul...@openss7.org� world; the unreasonable one persists in  �
http://www.openss7.org/ � trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. �
� Therefore  all  progress  depends on the �
� unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw �

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Dick Hollenbeck]

On 03/21/2012 07:21 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
 Miguel,

 Printed circuit board designs are not protected under copyright.

 --brian

Why not?


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Dick Hollenbeck]

On 03/21/2012 01:47 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote:
 For wider adoption, may be a LGPL / MIT or BSD license would make more sense.

 In my opinion the libraries may be license neutral, or public domain.

 It would be great if companies started using Kicad for normal
 development without
 any legal problems.


I agree with you Miguel.  This needs to be thought through better.  

The GPLv2 is probably not the proper license, although making a licensing 
change without
consulting the owner(s) is also not possible.

Arbitrarily stating that the libraries are now public domain would essentially 
be stealing
from the owner(s).

So we need to proceed with caution, but we do need to look at this, especially 
with SWEET
down the road.

Dick




___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Brian F. G. Bidulock]

Dick,

Because only artistic works, software and chip masks are
protected by copyright (internationally).  Functional items
such a PCB boards are not protected.  Using library data to
make a board is using your copy of the data anyhoo: not
copying it and distributing it...  So you can make whatever
boards you want from the library data and your boards will
not be subject to any copyright provisions the author of the
data attempted to attach to them.  This also appies to entire
board designs.

--brian

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:

 On 03/21/2012 07:21 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
  Miguel,
 
  Printed circuit board designs are not protected under copyright.
 
  --brian
 
 Why not?
 
 
 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock� The reasonable man adapts himself to the �
bidul...@openss7.org� world; the unreasonable one persists in  �
http://www.openss7.org/ � trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. �
� Therefore  all  progress  depends on the �
� unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw �

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Brian F. G. Bidulock]

Dick,

See, for example:

 http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLHardware

--brian

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:

 Dick,
 
 Because only artistic works, software and chip masks are
 protected by copyright (internationally).  Functional items
 such a PCB boards are not protected.  Using library data to
 make a board is using your copy of the data anyhoo: not
 copying it and distributing it...  So you can make whatever
 boards you want from the library data and your boards will
 not be subject to any copyright provisions the author of the
 data attempted to attach to them.  This also appies to entire
 board designs.
 
 --brian
 
 On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
 
  On 03/21/2012 07:21 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
   Miguel,
  
   Printed circuit board designs are not protected under copyright.
  
   --brian
  
  Why not?
  
  
  ___
  Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
  Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
  Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
  More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
 
 -- 
 Brian F. G. Bidulock? The reasonable man adapts himself to the ?
 bidul...@openss7.org? world; the unreasonable one persists in  ?
 http://www.openss7.org/ ? trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. ?
 ? Therefore  all  progress  depends on the ?
 ? unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ?
 

 ___
 Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock� The reasonable man adapts himself to the �
bidul...@openss7.org� world; the unreasonable one persists in  �
http://www.openss7.org/ � trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. �
� Therefore  all  progress  depends on the �
� unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw �

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Heiko Rosemann]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Everyone,

On 03/21/2012 10:44 PM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
 Dick,
 
 Because only artistic works, software and chip masks are protected 
 by copyright (internationally).  Functional items such a PCB
 boards are not protected.  Using library data to make a board is
 using your copy of the data anyhoo: not copying it and
 distributing it... So you can make whatever boards you want from
 the library data and your boards will not be subject to any
 copyright provisions the author of the data attempted to attach to
 them.  This also appies to entire board designs.
 
 --brian
 
 On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
 
 On 03/21/2012 07:21 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
 Miguel,
 
 Printed circuit board designs are not protected under 
 copyright.
 
 --brian
 
 Why not?

Let me make a more general comment: I think this may be different in
different countries. Plus, depending on the country, the authorities
may or may not accept there is no international copyright protection
on PCBs when someone sues someone else about violating some license
with the help of kicad.

So what I am saying is we should mention countries along with such
statements, and before starting a re-licensing process, try and find
out in which countries people would benefit from it.

As you can see from my vagueness, I'm not really deep into the
legalese. But from my understanding, the GPL does not enforce anyone
to license their work under GPL if they are merely using the library
(as in using it in a schematic/board, similar to linking a code
library together with their program) but this is enforced if they are
doing work based on the library (as in distributing another library
using footprints from the GPLed library)

I don't know if this clears anything up or further muddies the waters,
but I hope for the first,

Heiko

- -- 
eMails verschlüsseln mit PGP - privacy is your right!
Mein PGP-Key zur Verifizierung: http://pgp.mit.edu

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk9qUccACgkQ/Vb5NagElAXJIgCgqrHCjQks4PRgB4tXUi8l3y8D
DyAAnRXTq1Vn+iyNWSkzBLLT0Ua1+u5w
=wf1k
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License

[Brian F. G. Bidulock]

Heiko,

Footprints are not subject to copyright either.  They are not
creative: (if they are any good) they are simple data gathered
from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources.  The same applies to
standard symbols used in a schematic library.

It's not worth worrying about: really.

--brian

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Heiko Rosemann wrote:
 
 Let me make a more general comment: I think this may be different in
 different countries. Plus, depending on the country, the authorities
 may or may not accept there is no international copyright protection
 on PCBs when someone sues someone else about violating some license
 with the help of kicad.
 
 So what I am saying is we should mention countries along with such
 statements, and before starting a re-licensing process, try and find
 out in which countries people would benefit from it.
 
 As you can see from my vagueness, I'm not really deep into the
 legalese. But from my understanding, the GPL does not enforce anyone
 to license their work under GPL if they are merely using the library
 (as in using it in a schematic/board, similar to linking a code
 library together with their program) but this is enforced if they are
 doing work based on the library (as in distributing another library
 using footprints from the GPLed library)
 
 I don't know if this clears anything up or further muddies the waters,
 but I hope for the first,
 

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock� The reasonable man adapts himself to the �
bidul...@openss7.org� world; the unreasonable one persists in  �
http://www.openss7.org/ � trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. �
� Therefore  all  progress  depends on the �
� unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw �

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp