Kevin,
You may not have the ability to litigate but your college does to some
degree. Earlham likely also has some IP rules that you probably want to
be aware of. Probably a good place to start is with your ITPC committee
who formulated your copyright policies a while back. You also want to be
Kevin Hunter scripsit:
> We're not tied to OSI approval; that statement was more of an attempt
> to elucidate that we were hoping for an OSI approved license if it
> existed, and to ask if the text of the OSI licenses was free for us to
> munge into our own license. In essence, what is the licens
Kevin,
If you want to make everything fit in the framework of Free Software,
you can get a lawyer for free through the Software Freedom Conservancy,
and there is a well-established history of them going to court for their
clients. But you have to fit in their parameters of Free Software.
It'
At 2:14pm -0400 Mon, 30 Apr 2012, Nigel H. Tzeng wrote:
You probably have already done this but I suggest seeing if the
ScienceCommons and NeuroCommons projects offers something to your liking.
Embarrassingly, I had not run across those. I'll get back once I've had
a chance to digest them. T
On 04/30/2012 10:13 AM, John Cowan wrote:
Conditional copyright licenses are most closely analogous to
conditional licenses to enter land
:-)
Well, this is more than a bit of a stretch, but I can argue it this way
if you like.
Of course, in civil law land, licenses are contracts, period.
The
Tzeng, Nigel H. scripsit:
> IMHO you are better served to release under a permissive license and build
> a community that encourages sharing than attempt to force sharing.
In general I agree, but having a mandatory-sharing license can actually
work to the advantage of investigators. They can s
You probably have already done this but I suggest seeing if the
ScienceCommons and NeuroCommons projects offers something to your liking.
http://neurocommons.org/page/Main_Page
http://creativecommons.org/science
It would be highly useful to have a single set of licenses to cover data,
software a
Bruce Perens scripsit:
> What you need is a contract, not a license. In general the Open
> Source licenses only deal with copyright, and you can't compel some
> action unrelated to copyright, like publication of research results,
> with a simple license.
Do you have case law for this claim? Cond
On 04/30/2012 08:36 AM, Kevin Hunter wrote:
I'm not looking for responses along the lines of "you can't enforce it
so ignore it." I'm very specifically focused on the licensing aspect.
Hi Kevin,
People who understand what they're doing won't generally write a license
that can't be enforced be
Hullo List,
For a scientific computing project, I'd like to encourage redistribution
of software upon publication of research results (e.g. academic
journals) by third parties using our code. I'm not currently aware of
any license geared toward this scenario. (There are lots of examples of
10 matches
Mail list logo
