Re: [deal.II] Question on copyright, licensing, authorship & attribution for reuse of (parts of) tutorial programs

[Krishnakumar Gopalakrishnan]

Thank you so much for your kind explanation.

I thought that maybe the common landing page for all the tutorials (the one 
with the graphviz dot-diagram relationship) is a possible candidate. But I 
understand why its probably also not the best since most pages have already 
lengthy content and any additional wording is better reserved for technical 
explanations.

Regards,
Krishna

On Thursday, March 12, 2020 at 2:05:41 PM UTC, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
>
> > /"But they're all licensed under the same LGPL license."/ 
> > 
> > Ah. I get it now. The library includes the tutorials as well, right? So 
> LGPL 
> > should apply everywhere. 
>
> Correct. Every tutorial file says that on line 8 :-) 
>
>
> > This is confusing because the number of deal.ii based user programs are 
> two 
> > orders of magnitude larger than the number of code gallery programs. 
> What is 
> > the vetting process of submissions and acceptance to the code-gallery? 
> Is this 
> > documented somewhere? 
>
> Yes, there are many more programs out there. But not everyone wants to 
> share 
> theirs. The procedure for contributing is documented if you hit the third 
> of 
> the orange buttons on the page I linked to: 
>https://dealii.org/code-gallery.html 
>
>
> > Is there a mechanism of linking an existing public 
> github/gitlab/bitbucket 
> > repo to the code gallery? That would be very useful since any time the 
> authors 
> > update their codes in github, the code gallery picks it up, and everyone 
> can 
> > benefit from the latest codes. 
>
> We don't have this kind of mechanism. But I think it's also the right 
> thing to 
> do to freeze the status of these programs at a time of submission. 
> Otherwise, 
> programs may work one day but not the next if you use someone's code you 
> don't 
> know, and the documentation may not actually describe the code as it is. 
>
>
> > /Copyright: You own what you wrote. We continue to own whatever we wrote 
> in 
> > your program (and grant you the right to use what we own as long as you 
> stay 
> > within the confines of the license). 
> > / 
> > / 
> > / 
> > So, at the top of my source code (licensed under LGPL), if I explicitly 
> assert 
> > my own copyright on a line of text, and below that just say "This 
> program is 
> > based on the step-xx tutorial of deal.II", will that be sufficient to 
> cover 
> > all the copyrights involved? 
>
> You're overthinking this. This is sufficient, but the point is that we 
> *want* 
> you to use our codes. 
>
>
> > All the information discussed so far in this question might be very 
> helpful if 
> > posted on the tutorial landing page in the deal.ii website. Anyone who 
> is 
> > looking to write code based on the tutorials can potentially benefit 
> from this 
> > info. 
>
> Like so many other pieces of information, it would be useful to state, but 
> there is no good place, and every place I can think of would distract from 
> lessons I think are far more important to teach at that place... 
>
> Best 
>   W. 
>
> -- 
>  
> Wolfgang Bangerth  email: bang...@colostate.edu 
>  
> www: http://www.math.colostate.edu/~bangerth/ 
>
>

-- 
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see 
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"deal.II User Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to dealii+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dealii/f38379b4-5677-48d5-9c94-f11d31ec8a8b%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [deal.II] Question on copyright, licensing, authorship & attribution for reuse of (parts of) tutorial programs

[Wolfgang Bangerth]

/"But they're all licensed under the same LGPL license."/

Ah. I get it now. The library includes the tutorials as well, right? So LGPL 
should apply everywhere.


Correct. Every tutorial file says that on line 8 :-)


This is confusing because the number of deal.ii based user programs are two 
orders of magnitude larger than the number of code gallery programs. What is 
the vetting process of submissions and acceptance to the code-gallery? Is this 
documented somewhere?


Yes, there are many more programs out there. But not everyone wants to share 
theirs. The procedure for contributing is documented if you hit the third of 
the orange buttons on the page I linked to:

  https://dealii.org/code-gallery.html


Is there a mechanism of linking an existing public github/gitlab/bitbucket 
repo to the code gallery? That would be very useful since any time the authors 
update their codes in github, the code gallery picks it up, and everyone can 
benefit from the latest codes.


We don't have this kind of mechanism. But I think it's also the right thing to 
do to freeze the status of these programs at a time of submission. Otherwise, 
programs may work one day but not the next if you use someone's code you don't 
know, and the documentation may not actually describe the code as it is.



/Copyright: You own what you wrote. We continue to own whatever we wrote in 
your program (and grant you the right to use what we own as long as you stay 
within the confines of the license).

/
/
/
So, at the top of my source code (licensed under LGPL), if I explicitly assert 
my own copyright on a line of text, and below that just say "This program is 
based on the step-xx tutorial of deal.II", will that be sufficient to cover 
all the copyrights involved?


You're overthinking this. This is sufficient, but the point is that we *want* 
you to use our codes.



All the information discussed so far in this question might be very helpful if 
posted on the tutorial landing page in the deal.ii website. Anyone who is 
looking to write code based on the tutorials can potentially benefit from this 
info.


Like so many other pieces of information, it would be useful to state, but 
there is no good place, and every place I can think of would distract from 
lessons I think are far more important to teach at that place...


Best
 W.

--

Wolfgang Bangerth  email: bange...@colostate.edu
   www: http://www.math.colostate.edu/~bangerth/

--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see 
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "deal.II User Group" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to dealii+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dealii/73069749-bcd7-5765-db65-7b0c38e7b9f9%40colostate.edu.

Re: [deal.II] Question on copyright, licensing, authorship & attribution for reuse of (parts of) tutorial programs

[Krishnakumar Gopalakrishnan]

Thank you so much for your answers.

*"But they're all licensed under the same LGPL license."*

Ah. I get it now. The library includes the tutorials as well, right? So 
LGPL should apply everywhere.

* In particular, that's why we came up  with the code gallery:
https://dealii.org/code-gallery.html *

This is confusing because the number of deal.ii based user programs are two 
orders of magnitude larger than the number of code gallery programs. What 
is the vetting process of submissions and acceptance to the code-gallery? 
Is this documented somewhere?
Is there a mechanism of linking an existing public github/gitlab/bitbucket 
repo to the code gallery? That would be very useful since any time the 
authors update their codes in github, the code gallery picks it up, and 
everyone can benefit from the latest codes.



*Copyright: You own what you wrote. We continue to own whatever we wrote in 
your program (and grant you the right to use what we own as long as you 
stay within the confines of the license). *

So, at the top of my source code (licensed under LGPL), if I explicitly 
assert my own copyright on a line of text, and below that just say "This 
program is based on the step-xx tutorial of deal.II", will that be 
sufficient to cover all the copyrights involved?

All the information discussed so far in this question might be very helpful 
if posted on the tutorial landing page in the deal.ii website. Anyone who 
is looking to write code based on the tutorials can potentially benefit 
from this info.

Regards,
Krishna


On Thursday, March 12, 2020 at 1:33:05 PM UTC, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
>
> > I see that some later tutorial programs have dois on Zenodo and certain 
> open 
> > licences attached to them.  However, most of the earlier tutorials do 
> not have 
> > this.  All of them do have a copyright line containing the author and 
> years. 
>
> But they're all licensed under the same LGPL license. 
>
>
> > The following are my specific questions: 
> > 
> >  1. Am I allowed to reuse one of the earlier tutorials as is and report 
> the 
> > simulation results (my project needs some additional post processing 
> of 
> > the FE solution field) in a journal publication? How would I 
> attribute this? 
>
> Yes, the license allows this. But like with all other uses of previously 
> known 
> material, standard scientific procedures state that you should cite your 
> sources. In the current case, add a reference to the tutorial program you 
> are 
> using. For example, this would work: 
>
> @Misc{dealiistep32, 
>author =   {M. Kronbichler and T. Heister and W. Bangerth}, 
>title ={deal.{II} tutorial program step-32, 
> \url{http://www.dealii.org/developer/doxygen/deal.II/step_32.html}}, 
>year = 2020 
> } 
>
> as would this: 
>
> @Book{step-49, 
> title = {The deal.II tutorial: step-49}, 
> year = 2013, 
> publisher = {
> https://www.dealii.org/developer/doxygen/deal.II/step\_49.html}, 
> author = {Timo Heister and Yuhan Zhou and Wolfgang Bangerth and David 
> Wells} 
> } 
>
> For some tutorials, no authors are easily identifiable. In that case, 
> either 
> omit the author list or list them as "The deal.II authors". 
>
>
> >  2. If I modify the tutorial code for my project, am I allowed to link 
> my 
> > github repo to the publication? What really constitutes a 
> modification of 
> > software code in general, and tutorial code in particular? 
> >   * Have time-dependent boundary conditions 
> >   * The generic variables of the tutorials will be renamed to the 
> > project-specific variables 
> >   * instead of the typical CG iterations, since the problem size is 
> small, 
> > replace it with direct solver 
> >   * Finally the problem is run in 1D 
> >   * Better refinement strategy if time permits 
> > 
> > If I were to embark on such an exercise i.e. make available an 
> open-source 
> > code linked to a journal publication, What would be my 
> > 
> >   * copyright and authorship rights? 
> >   * licensing and attribution requirements? 
>
> Up front: Of course we highly encourage this to happen! That's what we 
> write 
> deal.II for: So people use it for their own projects and, ideally, make 
> these 
> projects available to others as well. In particular, that's why we came up 
> with the code gallery: 
>https://dealii.org/code-gallery.html 
>
> The technical details governed by the license of deal.II. In particular, 
> if 
> you make your code available to anyone else, you need to license your code 
> in 
> a way that is compatible with the LGPL. For all practical purposes, that 
> will 
> mean that you have to license your code under either the GPL or the LGPL. 
> It 
> is of course always good practice to be open about where parts of your 
> code 
> come from, so it would make sense if there was a readme file or a comment 
> at 
> the top of your code that says 
>This 

Re: [deal.II] Question on copyright, licensing, authorship & attribution for reuse of (parts of) tutorial programs

[Wolfgang Bangerth]

I see that some later tutorial programs have dois on Zenodo and certain open 
licences attached to them.  However, most of the earlier tutorials do not have 
this.  All of them do have a copyright line containing the author and years.


But they're all licensed under the same LGPL license.



The following are my specific questions:

 1. Am I allowed to reuse one of the earlier tutorials as is and report the
simulation results (my project needs some additional post processing of
the FE solution field) in a journal publication? How would I attribute this?


Yes, the license allows this. But like with all other uses of previously known 
material, standard scientific procedures state that you should cite your 
sources. In the current case, add a reference to the tutorial program you are 
using. For example, this would work:


@Misc{dealiistep32,
  author =   {M. Kronbichler and T. Heister and W. Bangerth},
  title ={deal.{II} tutorial program step-32, 
\url{http://www.dealii.org/developer/doxygen/deal.II/step_32.html}},

  year = 2020
}

as would this:

@Book{step-49,
title = {The deal.II tutorial: step-49},
year = 2013,
publisher = {https://www.dealii.org/developer/doxygen/deal.II/step\_49.html},
author = {Timo Heister and Yuhan Zhou and Wolfgang Bangerth and David Wells}
}

For some tutorials, no authors are easily identifiable. In that case, either 
omit the author list or list them as "The deal.II authors".




 2. If I modify the tutorial code for my project, am I allowed to link my
github repo to the publication? What really constitutes a modification of
software code in general, and tutorial code in particular?
  * Have time-dependent boundary conditions
  * The generic variables of the tutorials will be renamed to the
project-specific variables
  * instead of the typical CG iterations, since the problem size is small,
replace it with direct solver
  * Finally the problem is run in 1D
  * Better refinement strategy if time permits

If I were to embark on such an exercise i.e. make available an open-source 
code linked to a journal publication, What would be my


  * copyright and authorship rights?
  * licensing and attribution requirements?


Up front: Of course we highly encourage this to happen! That's what we write 
deal.II for: So people use it for their own projects and, ideally, make these 
projects available to others as well. In particular, that's why we came up 
with the code gallery:

  https://dealii.org/code-gallery.html

The technical details governed by the license of deal.II. In particular, if 
you make your code available to anyone else, you need to license your code in 
a way that is compatible with the LGPL. For all practical purposes, that will 
mean that you have to license your code under either the GPL or the LGPL. It 
is of course always good practice to be open about where parts of your code 
come from, so it would make sense if there was a readme file or a comment at 
the top of your code that says

  This program is based on the step-6 tutorial of deal.II.
or something similar.

Copyright: You own what you wrote. We continue to own whatever we wrote in 
your program (and grant you the right to use what we own as long as you stay 
within the confines of the license).


Best
 W.

--

Wolfgang Bangerth  email: bange...@colostate.edu
   www: http://www.math.colostate.edu/~bangerth/

--
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see 
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "deal.II User Group" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to dealii+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dealii/84f684ec-05b7-137f-ff2d-8d9b0999f5ff%40colostate.edu.

[deal.II] Question on copyright, licensing, authorship & attribution for reuse of (parts of) tutorial programs

[Krishnakumar Gopalakrishnan]

While, I understand that deal.Ii (the library itself) is licensed under 
LGPL 2.1 or above, this question is about reuse of tutorial programs in own 
research.

I see that some later tutorial programs have dois on Zenodo and certain 
open licences attached to them.  However, most of the earlier tutorials do 
not have this.  All of them do have a copyright line containing the author 
and years.

The following are my specific questions:

   1. Am I allowed to reuse one of the earlier tutorials as is and report 
   the simulation results (my project needs some additional post processing of 
   the FE solution field) in a journal publication? How would I attribute this?
   2. If I modify the tutorial code for my project, am I allowed to link my 
   github repo to the publication? What really constitutes a modification of 
   software code in general, and tutorial code in particular? 
  - Have time-dependent boundary conditions 
  - The generic variables of the tutorials will be renamed to the 
  project-specific variables
   - instead of the typical CG iterations, since the problem size is small, 
  replace it with direct solver 
  - Finally the problem is run in 1D
  - Better refinement strategy if time permits
  
If I were to embark on such an exercise i.e. make available an open-source 
code linked to a journal publication, What would be my

   - copyright and authorship rights?
   - licensing and attribution requirements?


Regards,
Krishna

-- 
The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/
For mailing list/forum options, see 
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"deal.II User Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to dealii+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dealii/d928933c-05ed-42d4-b875-09d258dbbdc9%40googlegroups.com.