Subject:
|
Re: Parts license
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Mon, 25 Sep 2000 19:23:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1313 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Leonardo Zide wrote:
> I think redistribution is too vague, we should have different
> conditions for unmodified and for modified versions of the library.
I agree.
> My
> simplified view of how things should be:
>
> - Anyone is free to redistribute unmodified versions of the library
> (unmodified includes conversion to another format without changes to the
> content) if they only charge a small fee, give credit to the authors and
> include the license.
What does 'conversion to another format' mean? Do you mean converting the
ARJ archive to ZIP format? How about converting the ASCII data to EBCDIC?
Or doing a straight conversion to a binary format?[1] How about
reorganizing the directory structure? How about unarchiving the
distribution file, and posting all the files individually on a webserver?
> - Anyone is free to redistribute modified versions of the library if
> they give credit to the authors, list their changes and publish the
> changes to existing files under our license. New files added to the
> library can have any license.
"give credit to the authors" needs to be defined more clearly. Right now,
it's very difficult to give credit to each author. Over time, this will
probably become even more difficult. How about "give credit to ldraw.org"
or "give collective credit to the authors".
I'm not sure about "list their changes". How about requiring that they
flag each file they change, by adding a comment to the file header?
Also, they may *not* mark new files with the tags "Original LDraw
[Part|Primitive|Subpart]" or "Official LCAD [Part|Primitive|Subpart]".
Finally, I'm not sure about the advisability of stating "New files add to
the library can have any license". (A) We can't *tell* them how to
distribute their own property, (B) How are downstream users going to know
which are which? I'd rather require that new files either a) be
distributed separately/distinctly from the library or b) new files be
distributed under the same terms.
--
Steve
1) BTW, truly 'dumb' conversions to binary (where every parameter is
written as a 4-byte floating point) don't seem to save any space.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Parts license
|
| (...) I think all of those examples are simply conversions to other formats, they don't change the contents of the files. This could be added to the 'Definitions' section of the license. (...) From the zlib license: 1. The origin of this software (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Parts license
|
| (...) And who would that group be ? Only person who actually do some work directly for ldraw.org or it includes everyone who contributed a part to the library or a program ? (...) I think redistribution is too vague, we should have different (...) (24 years ago, 21-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
73 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
