Hi Kaspar! > 1. The entity distributing such a product must mention the use of RIOT.
Isn't that the case also for some non-copyleft licenses (e.g. some BSD-style licenses)? Not sure, just asking. > This requires the device to be field-upgradable I still seriously doubt this. We're talking about IoT devices. Most of them are gonna be deeply embedded with no possibility for any end user to reprogram them - if you're not a hardcore electric magician (soldering, etching stuff...). > As far as I interpret the opinions of the RIOT community, we mostly agree > that the actual license does what we expect our license to do (apart from > patent protection). I'm not convinced that a potential commercial user of RIOT is able to link its (closed-source/non-LGPL) software/driver/whatever against RIOT without risking to disclose something it doesn't want to disclose. > The only reason why we think about another license change is FUD on the > company side, as the perception of the license scares away potential users. > We don't want to push away potential users, so we try to find a license > which takes away the FUD by giving up all rights to the code that we develop > in order to please those companies. I'm not willing to give up all rights - nor is any of the other RIOT developers I've talked to. But I don't think we have to. > IMHO, we don't need those companies to succeed as a community project which > will play a large role in IoT. I pray for that, but I'm not convinced that this is enough - given that the recipient of my prayer is pretty much unknown. > That said, if most of the community agrees to switch to a less restrictive > license, I will agree to that, too. That is not because I have been > convinced that the change is the right choice, but because I really like the > biggest strength of RIOT: the community and the actual people behind it. I don't want to force you (or any other active member of the RIOT community) to change the license or whatever else to something she/he doesn't feel comfortable with. I want to keep the project I'm contributing to for the last five years alive. My perception of the situation is, that we have to make a bet: - Stay with copyleft licensing and hope that we will still find enough contributors in the long run to keep RIOT developing at the current speed (with the monetary support from research projects). - Open the license to something less morally and less educational to attract more companies willing to give money to some people to do what the love: coding RIOT, and trying to keep the momentum in the community so high that theses companies don't have any incentive to do their RIOT-based stuff behind closed doors. It's up to the community to decide which bet they're willing to take. I can live with both solutions. Either as a person being proud of doing the ethical correct thing or as a person hoping that the last five years commitment to this project helped to make the world a better place. Cheers, Oleg -- Fragmentation jokes... ...are always... ...told in parts.
pgpSDIwEE7LCD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org http://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
