SitePoint.com

ArticleBot · Mar 9, 2005, 05:12

This is an article discussion thread for discussing the SitePoint article, "Navigating Open Source Licensing"

MikeFoster · Mar 21, 2005, 16:15

I'm glad to see more discussion on this topic, but there are a few comments in this article to which I must respond. I'm an author of a Javascript library distributed under the terms of the GNU LGPL so this is the perspective I will take in the following comments.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blane Warrene

The beauty of the open source license is its assignment of copyright (and patents, if held by the author) to the end user and re-distributor without compensation.

Assignment of copyright to the end user? No way - this is wrong. I retain my copyright. In fact my copyright is the only thing that gives me the authority to grant specific distribution and modification rights to the end-user.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blane Warrene

Following the GPL is the Limited GPL (LGPL)...

The LGPL was originally called the "Library GPL". It is now called the "Lesser GPL". Perhaps at one time it was called limited but I have never seen it - in fact for an end-user the LGPL is less restrictive than the GPL.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blane Warrene

2. Reciprocal Licenses
...The resulting new software must also be free.

This is very misleading and further complicated by the previous statement about no compensation (see first quote above). The term "Free Software" is still very much misunderstood. When we discuss this topic we should help to clarify the issue and not perpetuate the myths. In the preamble to the GPL and LGPL is the following:

Quote:

Originally Posted by gnu.org

When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service if you wish)...

I didn't originate this statment but I like it: You should think of "Free" as in "Free Speech" not "Free Beer"

Resources:

The Free Software Definition.
The Open Source Definition
GNU Licenses
Open Source Initiative
The Free Software Foundation

**bwarrene** · Mar 21, 2005, 20:57

[quote=MikeFoster]
Assignment of copyright to the end user? No way - this is wrong. I retain my copyright. In fact my copyright is the only thing that gives me the authority to grant specific distribution and modification rights to the end-user.

You are correct - I should have been perhaps more clear so as to prevent semantic discussions. It extends the rights of use to the end user rather - however - some extend patent assignment and even in some cases do extend copyright. In essence though - this is what the license does - frees the user from being concerned over infringement of the developers copyright so long as they adhere to the spirit of the license.

The LGPL was originally called the "Library GPL". It is now called the "Lesser GPL". Perhaps at one time it was called limited but I have never seen it - in fact for an end-user the LGPL is less restrictive than the GPL.

====
I was in a project in 2003 that uses the LGPL and found it flexible - it is simply the GNU option when mixing licensing (in very simple terms) as an alternative to the GPL. One can leverage an LGPL solution within an app - and insure they pass along the source and license for that portion - and still utilize a different license for the remainder.
====

This is very misleading and further complicated by the previous statement about no compensation (see first quote above). The term "Free Software" is still very much misunderstood. When we discuss this topic we should help to clarify the issue and not perpetuate the myths. In the preamble to the GPL and LGPL is the following:

I didn't originate this statment but I like it: You should think of "Free" as in "Free Speech" not "Free Beer"

===
Remember we are talking about more than the GPL here - but an additional 50 plus licenses with varying levels of freedom (perhaps the wrong word).

Open Source legal experts have said it is a mixed bag - some cases it is free speech, in others it is free beer.

Thanks much for reading and I do hope these conversation continue!

Blane

MikeFoster · Mar 21, 2005, 22:37

Mar 9, 2005, 05:12	#1
ArticleBot SitePoint Articles Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 0	Article Discussion This is an article discussion thread for discussing the SitePoint article, "Navigating Open Source Licensing"

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Mar 21, 2005, 20:57	#3
bwarrene SitePoint Columnist Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Ohio Posts: 747	[quote=MikeFoster] Assignment of copyright to the end user? No way - this is wrong. I retain my copyright. In fact my copyright is the only thing that gives me the authority to grant specific distribution and modification rights to the end-user. You are correct - I should have been perhaps more clear so as to prevent semantic discussions. It extends the rights of use to the end user rather - however - some extend patent assignment and even in some cases do extend copyright. In essence though - this is what the license does - frees the user from being concerned over infringement of the developers copyright so long as they adhere to the spirit of the license. The LGPL was originally called the "Library GPL". It is now called the "Lesser GPL". Perhaps at one time it was called limited but I have never seen it - in fact for an end-user the LGPL is less restrictive than the GPL. ==== I was in a project in 2003 that uses the LGPL and found it flexible - it is simply the GNU option when mixing licensing (in very simple terms) as an alternative to the GPL. One can leverage an LGPL solution within an app - and insure they pass along the source and license for that portion - and still utilize a different license for the remainder. ==== This is very misleading and further complicated by the previous statement about no compensation (see first quote above). The term "Free Software" is still very much misunderstood. When we discuss this topic we should help to clarify the issue and not perpetuate the myths. In the preamble to the GPL and LGPL is the following: I didn't originate this statment but I like it: You should think of "Free" as in "Free Speech" not "Free Beer" === Remember we are talking about more than the GPL here - but an additional 50 plus licenses with varying levels of freedom (perhaps the wrong word). Open Source legal experts have said it is a mixed bag - some cases it is free speech, in others it is free beer. Thanks much for reading and I do hope these conversation continue! Blane

Mar 21, 2005, 22:37	#4
MikeFoster I'll take mine raw Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Alabama, USA Posts: 2,561