Re: Need advice for dual licensing
On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 15:25 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: [NB: Please follow Debian list policy and do not Cc: people unless they explicitly request a Cc. The canonical method of requesting a Cc: is to set a Mail-Followup-To: header that includes your addres. Also, you'll have much better luck if you refrain from top posting.] I'm very sorry, the top posting was not intentional. I will also try not to Cc: to people who don't want an extra copy. On Fri, 13 May 2005, Svante Signell wrote: I just wanted to know if dual licensing is possible. It is possible, but when we talk about dual licensing we typically mean that two licenses are applied to a work, and the user can (at the user's option) pick a specific license to use the work under. OK, so this is the case e.g. with mozilla and openoffice? What you seemed to be asking for was two licenses for different (disjoint) sets of users, which isn't going to be DFSG Free unless both licenses are DFSG Free. [And possibly not even then... we'd have to look at it very closely.] Is it possible to release the code as GPL and if necessary relicense at a later stage? Do all contributors to the improved version have to agree on this change of licence. What about copyright issues for contributed code? Don Armstrong -- Svante Signell -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Need advice for dual licensing
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 12:38:20PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: in response to Don Armstrong I'm very sorry, the top posting was not intentional. I will also try not to Cc: to people who don't want an extra copy. On Fri, 13 May 2005, Svante Signell wrote: I just wanted to know if dual licensing is possible. It is possible, but when we talk about dual licensing we typically mean that two licenses are applied to a work, and the user can (at the user's option) pick a specific license to use the work under. OK, so this is the case e.g. with mozilla and openoffice? Exactly so. OpenOffice is (some Sun licence) and GPL, Mozilla is MPL in parts and GPL - if I recall correctly. A better instance is Perl - which explicitly offers you the GPL or the Perl Artistic licence at your option. What you seemed to be asking for was two licenses for different (disjoint) sets of users, which isn't going to be DFSG Free unless both licenses are DFSG Free. [And possibly not even then... we'd have to look at it very closely.] Is it possible to release the code as GPL and if necessary relicense at a later stage? Do all contributors to the improved version have to agree on this change of licence. What about copyright issues for contributed code? All contributors would have to agree - in practice, it's very unlikely to happen. Much better is to produce a minimal closed source licence for your commercial/private code - then open it after a period as GPL. This is how Ghostscript worked/works: I think it's also how CUPS works. You can only really do this if you have private code of significant value to begin with. It may also be worth looking at MySQL's way of doing things, or of providing the code free under the GPL but charging for support - and insisting that commercial use requires a support licence to include rights to use your logo and brand [which is more or less what Red Hat is doing at the moment - once your licence terminates, not only can you not get updates but you probably should remove all RH logos/artwork and so on. The RH clones - CentOS, White Box Linux - have to get around this by not including any of the logos/artwork at the beginning.] Not good really, software/information wants to be free :) Andy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[CSIkey:177241] Gegen das Vergessen
Your message is being held in a quarantine until you can be identified as a real person. All you need to do to prove you are an actual person is to reply to this message. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Where to put Open Transport Tycoon (openttd)
Hey, I am making Debian packages of openttd and am thinking of getting them uploaded into Debian. Though it is licensed under GPL, I was wondering in what section it belongs. There are two reasons for this. First, openttd is non-working on itself, it needs the user to supply it with data files from the original ttd game (sounds and graphics). Secondly, I am not entirely sure where openttd originated from. I believe it was based on a disassembly or decompile of the original ttd game. I am not entirely sure how this holds up under, for example, US copyright law. The initial version of openttd was created in Finland, where this is supposed to be perfectly legal. Your opinions? Gr. Matthijs Kooijman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Where to put Open Transport Tycoon (openttd)
On 5/15/05, Matthijs Kooijman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am making Debian packages of openttd and am thinking of getting them uploaded into Debian. Though it is licensed under GPL, I was wondering in what section it belongs. There are two reasons for this. First, openttd is non-working on itself, it needs the user to supply it with data files from the original ttd game (sounds and graphics). Secondly, I am not entirely sure where openttd originated from. I believe it was based on a disassembly or decompile of the original ttd game. I am not entirely sure how this holds up under, for example, US copyright law. The initial version of openttd was created in Finland, where this is supposed to be perfectly legal. The requirement for content from the original game means that it should probably go in contrib. I wouldn't worry too much about the inspirations and motivations behind the implementation. In general, the gaming industry rather routinely borrows concepts and techniques from each other. From their point of view, this is probably a legitimate implementation. Of course, if you have any serious doubts about that you can contact the original game's publisher and ask them. Since, at least currently, you have to have a legal copy of the game to play openttd legally, they're not likely to object. Also, unless openttd includes design features which are clearly unique content, the original publishers probably won't have any legal grounds to object. [But you're not really described the situation enough to know if that could be an issue.] I wouldn't worry too much about the intent of the programs' requirement for game content constituting a GPL violation. From what you say, it's pretty clear that the copyright holders on the GPL content intend for it to be used this way -- they appear to think that the game content is not a part of the program. However, if you have any serious doubts, you should cntact the authors of openttdc and get clarification from them. In other words, the core of openttd has roughly the same status as documentation on the inner workings of the original game. But it's clearly been fleshed out quite a bit from that, with the intent of actually running against the original game data. So it's probably correct to put the game in contrib. But I'm just going from your brief writeup here, I've not attempted to figure out if there are any serious creative content issues that you've not described. If you have any doubts about those, I'd recommend you contact the people who would have copyrights on that content. Good luck, -- Raul
Re: Where to put Open Transport Tycoon (openttd)
I wrote: Also, unless openttd includes design features which are clearly unique content, the original publishers probably won't have any legal grounds I meant, and should have said ... which are clearly unique content of the publishers of the original game... Obviously, openttd's authors have a right to publish whatever unique content they came up with. -- Raul
Re: Where to put Open Transport Tycoon (openttd)
The requirement for content from the original game means that it should probably go in contrib. That is what I thought too, yes. Of course, if you have any serious doubts about that you can contact the original game's publisher and ask them. This has been tried by several people without too much succes. Since the rights to the game have transfered a few times due to company takeovers and other stuffs, it is not really clear who owns the game right now... The original author (Chris Sawyer) does not seem to respond either. Since, at least currently, you have to have a legal copy of the game to play openttd legally, they're not likely to object. Though this might change with in a future version, this will still hold for some time, yes. Also, unless openttd includes design features which are clearly unique content, the original publishers probably won't have any legal grounds to object. [But you're not really described the situation enough to know if that could be an issue.] As far as I can see, there are not really any ground breaking principles in the game that could pose a problem. So, I'll put it in contrib then. Thanks, Matthijs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
libpano12: patent problems
Package: libpano12 Version: 2.7.0.9-1 Severity: serious As has been pointed out multiple times in the ITP (obviously noone read it...) for panotools (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=251617), the original author of panotools/libpano, Helmut Dersch has been forced by patent lawsuits to abandon the program. Part of the story can be obtained here: http://vr.albury.net.au/%7Ekathyw/EyePics/ipix.html or by googling around (panotools patent). The situation seems to be analogue to the one around the mp3 encoders (lame see the thread starting at http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2000/06/msg01213.html) If that is correct, we can't have panotools/libpano in debian, not even non-free. Robert. -- Rincewind formed a mental picture of some strange entity living in a castle made of teeth. It was the kind of mental picture you tried to forget. Unsuccessfully. -- Terry Pratchett, The Light Fantastic
