GPL as an evaluation license
Hi list, I know you're not lawyers, but I though you could help me with a GPL issue. I'm writing a function library in C which I want to sell licenses for, targeting a specialized industry. To make my entry point better, I plan to release it under GPL (as opposed to LGPL) so that potential users can evaluate it properly before making a decision. My target industry is far far away from FOSS, so I'm pretty sure that they won't release their own code under GPL in order to adopt mine free (as in beer). So as long as I make sure I own all copyrights, will this work legally? Two main questions: (1) Is GPL giving me the enough protection? (2) Will GPL allow a company which hasn't bought a non-GPL license enough freedom to evaluate the library? What makes this slightly complicated, is what happens when company X decides to take my library and integrate it into their proprietary software for evaluation. Even for their internal copies, they can't badge the whole package as GPL, because they don't necessarily own the rights to all components, and may not even have all sources. So let's look at the case where the company has just linked my GPL'ed library with their proprietary source codes + proprietary libraries for which the company only has as binaries. Now person X wants to send a copy of the software's binary (my library included) to person Y, say over email. Under what conditions is it legal? If person Y works at the same company? For the same company (outsourcing)? Has access to everything necessary to build the software, so that person Y could in theory build the binary from software owned by the company + the library under GPL? TIA, Aviad ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: GPL as an evaluation license
IANAL either. But what you are looking for is, in principle, dual licensing. The providers of MySQL and Qt follow the same model. Their software libraries are available under either GPL (with all the restrictions it entails) or under a proprietary license. When a client of yours gets your software under proprietary license, you are free to impose whichever terms you want upon them, including terms under which they are allowed to transfer the software to third parties. --- Omer On Sat, 2011-04-09 at 15:50 +0300, Aviad Mandel wrote: Hi list, I know you're not lawyers, but I though you could help me with a GPL issue. I'm writing a function library in C which I want to sell licenses for, targeting a specialized industry. To make my entry point better, I plan to release it under GPL (as opposed to LGPL) so that potential users can evaluate it properly before making a decision. My target industry is far far away from FOSS, so I'm pretty sure that they won't release their own code under GPL in order to adopt mine free (as in beer). So as long as I make sure I own all copyrights, will this work legally? Two main questions: (1) Is GPL giving me the enough protection? (2) Will GPL allow a company which hasn't bought a non-GPL license enough freedom to evaluate the library? What makes this slightly complicated, is what happens when company X decides to take my library and integrate it into their proprietary software for evaluation. Even for their internal copies, they can't badge the whole package as GPL, because they don't necessarily own the rights to all components, and may not even have all sources. So let's look at the case where the company has just linked my GPL'ed library with their proprietary source codes + proprietary libraries for which the company only has as binaries. Now person X wants to send a copy of the software's binary (my library included) to person Y, say over email. Under what conditions is it legal? If person Y works at the same company? For the same company (outsourcing)? Has access to everything necessary to build the software, so that person Y could in theory build the binary from software owned by the company + the library under GPL? -- PHP - the language of the Vogons. My own blog is at http://www.zak.co.il/tddpirate/ My opinions, as expressed in this E-mail message, are mine alone. They do not represent the official policy of any organization with which I may be affiliated in any way. WARNING TO SPAMMERS: at http://www.zak.co.il/spamwarning.html ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: GPL as an evaluation license
On 09/04/11 15:50, Aviad Mandel wrote: Hi list, I know you're not lawyers, but I though you could help me with a GPL issue. Indeed. IANAL. TINLA. I'm writing a function library in C which I want to sell licenses for, targeting a specialized industry. To make my entry point better, I plan to release it under GPL (as opposed to LGPL) so that potential users can evaluate it properly before making a decision. My target industry is far far away from FOSS, so I'm pretty sure that they won't release their own code under GPL in order to adopt mine free (as in beer). So as long as I make sure I own all copyrights, will this work legally? Two main questions: (1) Is GPL giving me the enough protection? Probably not. (2) Will GPL allow a company which hasn't bought a non-GPL license enough freedom to evaluate the library? Probably. If you read the FSF's FAQ, you will see they do not consider making copies and using the same code inside one company as distribution, and therefor the GPL does not apply there, according to them. You can certainly adopt that view (and make it explicit) for code for which you are the copyright owner. The GPL, however, is limited in scope by the fact it is a copyright license. Where a copyright license is not needed, the GPL has no effect. This is a matter of increasing focus as GPL software becomes more and more prevalent, and thus is something you might want to take heart of. It is questionable whether merely dynamically linking to a GPL library is enough to force your software to be GPL or illegal. As such, I would not choose this license for that purpose. Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Lingnu Open Source Consulting Ltd. http://www.lingnu.com ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: GPL as an evaluation license
Sorry, I should have elaborated a bit more... On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Shachar Shemesh shac...@shemesh.biz wrote: It is questionable whether merely dynamically linking to a GPL library is enough to force your software to be GPL or illegal. As such, I would not choose this license for that purpose. I'm in the context of embedded software with no real underlying OS. That is, no dynamic linking is even possible. ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: GPL as an evaluation license
2011/4/9 Aviad Mandel aviad.man...@gmail.com Hi list, I know you're not lawyers, but I though you could help me with a GPL issue. IANAL, but I'll try. I'm writing a function library in C which I want to sell licenses for, targeting a specialized industry. To make my entry point better, I plan to release it under GPL (as opposed to LGPL) so that potential users can evaluate it properly before making a decision. This is not clear to me. With all the respect due to GPL, what makes you think that it will make evaluation better? Do you mean that reviewing your source code will allow them to evaluate it better? You can give source code to your potential customers under all sorts of terms. I am not trying to discourage you from using GPL, far from it. But your goals are not clear. My target industry is far far away from FOSS, so I'm pretty sure that they won't release their own code under GPL in order to adopt mine free (as in beer). So as long as I make sure I own all copyrights, will this work legally? Two main questions: (1) Is GPL giving me the enough protection? From what? What is your risk here? If you give Company XYZ your library under GPL they are free to use it, in either modifed or unmodified form. They can build their own product upon it. They can use it internally or they can host it on heir servers (just as example), and provide a service to their customers. They will not be able to *distribute* the library or any derivative work without the distributed stuff being under GPL. Bottom line, you have not given enough information about your customers' business (or about your business) to give you a yes/no answer. (2) Will GPL allow a company which hasn't bought a non-GPL license enough freedom to evaluate the library? Depends on what evaluation consists of. If evaluation is strictly internal (or providing a beta-service to customers) then yes. If Company XYZ needs to give a copy of their software linked to your library to someone (who does not work for them) then probably no. What makes this slightly complicated, is what happens when company X decides to take my library and integrate it into their proprietary software for evaluation. Even for their internal copies, they can't badge the whole package as GPL, because they don't necessarily own the rights to all components, and may not even have all sources. This does not matter. I assume the legal relationship here is between you and Company XYZ. So in-house they can do whatever they want - it's not distribution. of course, if some other piece of software has a license that says do not link this to anything GPLed then there is a problem. I have not seen such clauses. So let's look at the case where the company has just linked my GPL'ed library with their proprietary source codes + proprietary libraries for which the company only has as binaries. Now person X wants to send a copy of the software's binary (my library included) to person Y, say over email. Under what conditions is it legal? If person Y works at the same company? For the same company (outsourcing)? Has access to everything necessary to build the software, so that person Y could in theory build the binary from software owned by the company + the library under GPL? This does make it complicated, and more than slightly complicated. The key here is the notion of distribution. Case 1: Mr. Y is an employee of Company XYZ. No problem - giving a copy to Mr. Y is not distribution. Case 2: Mr. Y is a contractor. Does his contract with Company XYZ include the provision that his work is work for hire? If yes, then maybe it is OK (in the US). If not, then (e.g., in the US) the contractor is an independent entity and giving him a copy constitutes distribution. Case 3: Mr. Y actually works for a subsidiary of Company XYZ. Even if the subsidiary is wholly owned by XYZ it is, by law, an independent entity. So it is distribution. (Still it may not matter in practice, or it may.) Case 4: Mr. Y is a consultant who works under NDA on a project for Company XYZ. NDA or no NDA it may be a problem for XYZ, for Mr. Y, for both, and for you. There are probably many more relevant situations, and different laws in different countries may or may not apply. If Mr. Y is crucial to make the evaluation problems may arise. -- Oleg Goldshmidt | p...@goldshmidt.org ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: GPL as an evaluation license
More clarification is due indeed... On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Oleg Goldshmidt p...@goldshmidt.org wrote: I'm writing a function library in C which I want to sell licenses for, targeting a specialized industry. To make my entry point better, I plan to release it under GPL (as opposed to LGPL) so that potential users can evaluate it properly before making a decision. This is not clear to me. With all the respect due to GPL, what makes you think that it will make evaluation better? Do you mean that reviewing your source code will allow them to evaluate it better? You can give source code to your potential customers under all sorts of terms. It's true that I could try to write an evaluation contract, but the whole idea here is to tempt the engineers to download my library and to try it out. If they steal code snippets, even better. Signing a long contract (even click I agree) may be a chilling factor. This is free software, released under the GNU Public License sounds by far less threatening to the common programmer. It's all in the embedded software field. Actually using the software equals to distribute it in the company's products. As long as they run it in the lab, it's still evaluation. And we all like to have the source. This is an extra plus over typical proprietary software vendors. And I need all advantages I can get. ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: GPL as an evaluation license
On Sat, Apr 09, 2011, Aviad Mandel wrote about Re: GPL as an evaluation license: It's true that I could try to write an evaluation contract, but the whole idea here is to tempt the engineers to download my library and to try it out. Why would they be tempted less if the code was available on your site, but not GPL but rather some home-brewed you can only try this for personal use terms? You're right that as an engineer, I would be much more likely to try some library if it's code was available *now*, and only *later* worry about how my company would buy a license - but I don't know why I would think that GPL is better in that sense than any other random license. In fact, in some cases you might achieve the opposite of what you intended. In some companies, using a GPL library is considered a faux-pas, as if it is some sort of contagious illness. Instead of attracting engineers with the GPL, you might end up scaring (some of) them... If they steal code snippets, even better. Why is it better? Do you really think you can track these cases of stealing and sue them? I don't think you can base a real business on this marketing technique ;-) Signing a long contract (even click I agree) may be a chilling factor. I agree, but just like with the GPL, also with a custom license they don't need to sign anything. As long as the terms are clearly specified on the site (before the download) and in the downloaded software. You're right that if you start asking people to sign forms - even web forms - you'll immediately turn away 90% of the curious engineers. We've all been there, and turned away as soon as we saw these forms - that we didn't want to, or weren't allowed to, sign. It's all in the embedded software field. Actually using the software equals to distribute it in the company's products. As long as they run it in the lab, it's still evaluation. I don't know what your library is about, but have you considered other uses your library might have? E.g., what if Google, Facebook, or some other company which builds a million machines for its own use, decides that it is useful and uses it? The GPL allows it to. Would you mind that? If you would, then maybe the GPL isn't for you. And we all like to have the source. This is an extra plus over typical proprietary software vendors. And I need all advantages I can get. Indeed, the source is important. But source availability != GPL. -- Nadav Har'El| Saturday, Apr 9 2011, 6 Nisan 5771 n...@math.technion.ac.il |- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |A good programmer is someone who looks http://nadav.harel.org.il |both ways before crossing a one-way street. ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: some help in technical solution
Here is another very cheap solution: http://www.pjrc.com/teensy/ The small board has 25 digital I/Os and 7 analog for $16, and the larger one has 46 digital I/Os and 12 analog. If your competitors are close enough you can use one board for multiple inputs. Since you need to hook key presses which is measures by tens of milli-seconds in the best case, I believe long wires would pose no problems (propagation delay and bandwidth are not a problem). They even have ready made examples of emulating a mouse, a keyboard, a generic HID device, etc. Shipping costs would be $10-$16 on airmail, depending on package weight ($16 is for 2 pounds, about 0.9Kg, enough for at least 3 boards). An example using it: http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2011/04/the-awesome-button.html Udi On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Udi Finkelstein linux...@udif.com wrote: I think any analog DAQ based solution will be expensive. Use too many analog levels, and it will not be accurate. Use a small number of levels, and the price per port for analog connection will drive the price too high. You can try using computer mice. cheap 2 button+scroll wheel starts at 17NIS on zap. Such a mouse can provide at least 5 events: right button left button middle button (scroll wheel press) scroll up scroll down You can then take apart the mouse and repackage it, maybe replacing the wheel with 3 distinct switches. Ofcourse you might need powered hubs if you intend to drive 30 mice. You could try taking eight 4 port unpowered hubs (also starts at 17 NIS on zap), and if you computer has 8 free USB ports (many do these days), you could fit 30 mice, and hope that each port can drive 4 mice + hub. You will also have 2 spare ports (8*4-30)for the console keyboard/mouse. Another direction would be to use an arduino board. http://www.seeedstudio.com/depot/microcontrollers-arduino-compatible-c-132_133.html The cheapest $19 board has 14 digital inputs plus 6 analog ones which you can treat as digital if you like. 20 input pins can serve 5 users (4 input pins/user) or 6 users (3 input pins per user if you wire them smartly - 1 qualifier signal that is grounded by all 4 switches, and 2 more that are getting a 2-bit binary code. seeedstudio has free worldwide shipping for orders above $50. Udi 2011/4/6 yosi yarchi yosi.yar...@gmail.com Hi This is interesting idea. However, it support voting between 2 options, only, while I need at least 4 options. I thought that combination of analog DAQ and 4 push buttons with analog output may help here. Does someone have an idea about such combination (analog DAQ+edge unit)? With best regards Yosi Yarchi On 04/06/2011 10:55 AM, Jason Friedman wrote: I think the best solution would be to use a data acquisition device, either USB or PCI. Measurement computing sell relatively cheap devices, e.g. this USB one for $99: http://www.mccdaq.com/usb-data-acquisition/USB-1024-Series.aspx can measure 24 digital channels (you could get two if you need 30). Each competitor could have a small switch, which connects their input line to say a 5V power supply. You can then write a very simple program to detect when each competitor presses their switch (with sub-millisecond accuracy!). These devices apparently have linux support. Jason On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 2:44 PM, yosi yarchi yosi.yar...@gmail.comwrote: Hi all I need application that will be able to collect and process inputs from 30 (!) competitors, and will display the results very fast. The ideal solution could be to collect the inputs via SMS: each competitor send his answer, the application collect the answers (related to phone number) and process them. However, I can't assume that the competitors have mobile phones (they may be little childs...). I thought to use 30 USB numerical keyboards as input devices, connected with cables to 3 hubs, connected to the computer. However, I don't have experience with USB drivers at linux... Is it feasible? What should be the main guidelines for the solution? With best regards Yosi Yarchi ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il -- Jason Friedman Postdoctoral scholar Macquarie Centre for Cognitive Science Macquarie University, NSW 2109 Australia email: write.to.ja...@gmail.com web: http://curiousjason.com ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Tim O'Reilly in Tel Aviv?
Probably there for Kinnernet, which was last weekend On 04/08/2011 01:00 AM, Gabor Szabo wrote: http://twitter.com/#!/timoreilly/status/56248124934586368 Gabor ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il -- Michael Shiloh KA6RCQ www.teachmetomake.com teachmetomake.wordpress.com Keep informed at http://groups.google.com/group/teach-me-to-make ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
