The FAQ is from the previous links goes into a great deal of detail but unfortunately I don't have the time to parse through it. I found it useful to search for "software" on the FAQ page. http://www.cendi.gov/publications/04-8copyright.html#toc30
On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 6:15 PM, John Hall <johnhall...@gmail.com> wrote: > > https://www.usa.gov/government-works > It would be great to hear from an IP lawyer on this. > All licenses are attached through copyright laws and federal government > works cannot have a copyright so can not be released under a license. There > are literally no restrictions except those noted at the above link. > > Is there already an organization,or division an existing one, that acts as > a conservancy for open source contributions to US government works and also > promotes use of open licensing by state and local governments promoting > cooperation between them? If not what would make sense? > What organizations are there already involved in the e-government > ecosystem? > Should it be global or form a consortium of national and regional groups? > > I do not know what law would apply to a derivative. Perhaps an > organization could copyright the derivative portions - open source > community contributions, and apply the Apache or GPL license to the > contributed portions. If a project starts under the GPL license for example > and the government uses and extends it then I believe it's still GPL, or > this is a giant hole in the GPL license and would need fixing. > > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 5:18 PM, MBR <m...@arlsoft.com> wrote: > >> The critical piece of information missing is what license they plan to >> release it under. Will it be GPL? Some other GPL-compatible license? >> Some GPL-incompatible license? Public domain? They don't say. >> >> But they are asking for public comment. As important as it may be to get >> them to use the right terminology (Free Software instead of Open Source), I >> think it's far more important to try to get them to specify that the code >> will be licensed under some version of the GPL. I'm sure the FSF would >> prefer we advocate for GPLv3, but could we live with GPLv2 if that was the >> best we could get? >> >> Mark Rosenthal >> >> >> >> On 3/25/16 3:33 PM, Greg Rundlett (freephile) wrote: >> >>> The US Fed. Govt. is proposing a pilot program to release at least 20% of >>> newly developed custom code as 'OSS'. https://sourcecode.cio.gov/ >>> They're >>> accepting comments now. And since it's hosted on GitHub, you "comment" >>> via >>> the issue queue, and you can also fork the project and issue a pull >>> request. >>> >>> I forked it and created a pull request. >>> https://github.com/WhiteHouse/source-code-policy/pulls proposing to use >>> the >>> term 'Free Software' in place of 'Open Source' >>> >>> If the government actually goes through with 'open sourcing' their work, >>> it's actually a giant corporate handout because companies will have >>> greater >>> access to publicly funded works that they can then incorporate into >>> proprietary works. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> >>> Greg Rundlett >>> https://eQuality-Tech.com >>> https://freephile.org >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> Discuss@blu.org >>> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> Discuss@blu.org >> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > > _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss