Subject:
|
Re: License - again
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 13 Dec 2000 18:24:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1324 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Paul Gyugyi wrote:
> The key issue to deal with in the LCAD library is "abandonment".
> The license must allow active LCAD people to maintain, modify,
> convert and distribute parts that people author. The artistic
> license would prevent people from fixing a "bug" in your part,
> or modifying it to use new curve primitives.
BTW, you're talking about the "contributor's agreement" here, not a user or
distribution license.
I agree completely. My ideal "contributor's agreement" would be to act
like each contributed work existed as two independent entities, which had
been independently created and had no connection with each other. One
entitiy would be the author's complete property, and the other would be
ldraw.org's property. Neither party would have any control over what the
other party did with their file.
> It would also prevent them from taking your part and making it
> look really ugly, which is why some people like it.
That should be treated as an issue internal to ldraw.org; how revisions
accepted into the library.
> Whether or
> not you want to permit someone to create an image of a
> concentration camp and list your name in the credits is a
> another topic entirely...
Actually, that's the main topic for this thread: what's in the
user/distribution license?
I'm still leaning toward separate user and redistribution licenses, just to
be clear. They might be in the same document, or not.
> And, IMHO (IANAL), TLG would not touch the DAT format with a
> 10 foot pole, due to legal concerns.
And for the fact that they've already got their parts modelled in a real
CAD system.
> OTOH, I'm suprised no one has been approached by
> Ritvik -- I imagine an LDRAW disk in a Megabloks set would
> increase their market image.
Heh-heh. Until we told everyone what the "L" stood for.
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: License - again
|
| (...) In other words, the contributors grant ldraw.org the rights to do whatever they want with the parts. This should be in the parts submission page, along with a button "I have read and accept the terms of the agreement". It has nothing to do (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: License - again
|
| I like the artistic license, but not for a library of parts. The key issue to deal with in the LCAD library is "abandonment". The license must allow active LCAD people to maintain, modify, convert and distribute parts that people author. The (...) (24 years ago, 13-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
55 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
|
|
|
|
