Subject:
|
Re: Another license draft
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:54:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
551 times
|
| |
|
|
Sorry it's taken me so long to get back to this -- I've been too busy to
really dig into it.
Overall, I think this is a decent *redistribution* license. It does not
address:
1. The agreement(s) between the contributors and ldraw.org.
2. The fact that ldraw.org does not hold copyright to the components of the
library, but only the copyright to the complete library. This is not a key
issue for a redistribution license, I think.
3. The user license.
Also, I agree with Larry's comments; I'll try to avoid reiterating them.
In lugnet.cad.dev, Leonardo Zide wrote:
> ==============================================================
>
> Section I: Definitions
>
> "Owner" is the Software's copyright owner.
c /Software/Library/ here and everywhere.
> "Unaltered Version" is an exact duplicate of the Library as provided by
> the Owner. If you add to, delete, or change any files in the Software
> package, or if you add files to the Software, it is no longer an Unaltered
> Version.
Define "You". May be better to use a different term, and define that term.
Add "reorganize directory structure" in there somewhere -- the structure is
important.
> Straight conversions from the original ASCII format to a binary format
> is not considered an "Altered Version", provided that the contents of the
> library is not modified in any way.
I disagree with this. If downline users cannot access the files as
straight text, then there has been a fundamental change in the library.
The information has not changed, but the accessability has.
Also, add that changing the archive-method of the library is OK.
> Library: the set of DAT files, distributed by ldraw.org, and labeled as
> the 'LCAD Parts Library'.
I want to publish (as a separate document) a definition of an "LDraw Parts
library" or "LDraw-compatible Library", so we can specify that the LCAD
Library meets that definition.
> Redistribute: Making the Library available from a source other than the
> www.ldraw.org internet website.
Nope. Ldraw.org might decide to make the library available from somewhere
else. "Redistribute" is not a matter of "where", but "who".
> Section II: Requirements
>
> 1. The origin of this library must not be misrepresented; you must not
> claim that you wrote the original library. If you use this library
> in a product, an acknowledgment in the product documentation is
> required along with a link to http://www.ldraw.org.
c /an acknowledgment/a prominent acknowledgment/
I don't think 'prominent' is an actionable term, but I don't want the
information buried somewhere in the back pages.
> 4. You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole
> or in part contains or is derived from the Library or any part thereof,
> to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the
> terms of this License.
This is a big bad, like Larry said. Unless this clause is removed, I
cannot agree to this license.
> 5. If a new file is distributed with the library then it must be
> installed in a different
> directory then the original library or distributed in a separate
> archive.
Slight nit-picking on phrasing:
5. New files, which are redistributed with the library, must be installed
in a directory not included in the original library, or must be distributed
in a separate archive.
[snip remainder]
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Another license draft
|
| In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes: <snip> I got swamped and it took me a week to get another look. Wow, that was bad. I guess we have to try to wrap this up before we all forget to keep pushing. Where are we at now? No one addressed my points (...) (24 years ago, 12-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Another license draft
|
| Hi, After some more dicussion, I have come to the following proposal for the license. It's much simpler than Steve's first license but I think it covers all important points. I have also copied some parts of the GPL text because I think they are (...) (24 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev) !
|
9 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
|
|
|
|
