Re: [math] ACM license

[Mark R. Diggory]

I caution at assuming this is 'restrictive'. I would like to point out 
an important clause in this license that you should consider, I've 
received emails from ACM members who are following our project (I am 
actually an inactive ACM member myself). ACM is a member based 
organization just like Apache.

To copy otherwise, or to republish, requires
a fee and/or specific permission.
Basically what this is saying is "talk to us". ACM is suggesting 
involvement and acknowledgment of their efforts in organizing and 
archiving these algorithms. I think often these license clauses (while 
legally protecting the the license') are also grounds for establishing 
'legal' avenues of involvement and partnership.  This clause basically 
makes it the responsibility of ACM to decide if the terms and conditions 
of the license are to be applied. It gives them jurisdiction to alter 
the conditions for the license on a case by case basis. As such, if we 
have an interest in using ACM material, we should contact ACM and get an 
official position on the usage of such material for an Open Source 
Apache project and the legal bindings they would want in such a 
relationship..

We also have to consider here, what *copies are not made or distributed 
for direct commercial advantage* means in this case as well. This really 
appears similar (yet vague) to the Apache clause that suggests that you 
cannot use the Apache name as a label to promote your project. IE you 
can say 'Foobar, Powered by Apache', but you can't say 'Apache FooBar ', 
which suggests that Apache endorses your FooBar as an Apache product. I 
feel this is suggesting that you can't use the ACM algorithms as a basis 
to gain commercial advantage over another product, not that you are 
excluded from using them in a commercial product or to use them here?

Perhaps, as ACM has such a large repository of public source. Apache and 
ACM should get together and establish an avenue of opinion when it comes 
to this case and other cases where ACM algorithms may be applied in 
Apache Source code. Remember, the core necessity of Open Source 
licensing is about protecting the authors rights, not about restricting 
the reuse and development of Open Source code.

-Mark

Al Chou wrote:

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 

--- Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Many entries found in 
the
Netlib repository are from ACM publications, which
are subject to the 
following
policy:

    Submittal of  an  algorithm    for publication 
in   one of   the ACM
    Transactions implies that unrestricted use  of
the algorithm within a
    computer is permissible.   General permission 
to copy and distribute
    the algorithm without fee is granted provided
that the copies  are 
not
    made  or   distributed for  direct   commercial
advantage.    The 
ACM
    copyright notice and the title of the
publication and its date 
appear,
    and  notice is given that copying  is by
permission of the 
Association
    for Computing Machinery.  To copy otherwise, or
to republish, 
requires
    a fee and/or specific permission.
     

I don't know if I would call that Apache-compatible licensing terms. The 
language seems to specifically preclude distribution for profit, which is 
a restriction over and above the Apache license.
   

Darn, I should have read the Apache license first.  I didn't realize until this
morning how un-restrictive it is.  Oh, well.
Al

=====
Albert Davidson Chou
   Get answers to Mac questions at http://www.Mac-Mgrs.org/ .

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]