To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldrawOpen lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Development / Organizations / LDraw / 3073
3072  |  3074
Subject: 
library license
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
Date: 
Mon, 17 May 2004 14:13:30 GMT
Viewed: 
740 times
  
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Peter Howkins wrote:
You have more important things to sort out such as a parts
library license.

- We are focused on licensing as the first major task after we get
the organizational stuff done. We are still working on internal
organization stuff, but it's only been 3 days so far, so we're
doing good, I think.

My opinion is they should be placed in
the 'public domain',

- We are considering PD as one of the alternatives. It has some
advantages and some drawbacks. We're interested in input on the pros
and cons of all the various licensing schemes. How do you think parts
authors will view PD? The license scheme needs to encourage
contribution of new/revised parts and enable use.

I'd also recommend Public Domain, or something really short and
simple such as the zlib license.  Do you think it does enough to
encourage contributions back into the original library?


The zlib/libpng License

Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders>

This software is provided 'as-is', without any express or implied
warranty. In no event will the authors be held liable for any damages
arising from the use of this software.

Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any purpose,
including commercial applications, and to alter it and redistribute it
freely, subject to the following restrictions:

    1. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you
must not claim that you wrote the original software. If you use this
software in a product, an acknowledgment in the product documentation
would be appreciated but is not required.

    2. Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must
not be misrepresented as being the original software.

    3. This notice may not be removed or altered from any source
distribution.



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: library license
 
(...) I think Steve Bliss already has prepared something very similar to the zlib license. It should basically just be a matter of getting all the contributors to agree on it. Jacob (20 years ago, 17-May-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
  Re: library license
 
(...) I know the license has been discussed for a long time, but to add my two cents; I'd really like to see the parts library use a Creative Commons license, specifically the Attibution-ShareAlike license ((URL)) or the plain old Attribution (...) (20 years ago, 18-May-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Shortname and major focus of SteerCo (was Re: Steering Committee results
 
(...) - We chose SteerCo as the short form, but we didn't think it was such a huge topic that it warranted a special announcement, so we didn't make a special announcement about it. (...) - We are focused on licensing as the first major task after (...) (20 years ago, 17-May-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)

27 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR