<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
hm, I personally do not feel fine with such an attempt to concentrate
power in one institution that additionally has not totally clarified
legal structures.<br>
I much more prefer the decentralized approach of leaving copyright with
projects, which I believe is in the spirit of the Internet.<br>
-Peter<br>
<br>
<br>
Arnulf Christl (aka Seven) wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:1268434676.4356.22.camel@ushuaia" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 13:49 -0500, Daniel Morissette wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Andrea Aime wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Mind, GeoServer never actually used the dual licensing scheme, though
there has been some discussion on whether it would be possible
for OpenPlans (the copyright holder) to sell GeoServer source
code under a commercial license.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Um... I never realized this dual licensing possibility during
GeoServer's incubation.
Dual licensing / single copyright holder should become a question to
address for future incubated projects.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
This was my primary intention when asking in December [1] whether OSGeo
Incubation should more explicitly nudge projects into turning over their
Copyright. The answers were rather indifferent so I did not follow up.
Chris pointed out that from his perspective the process and resulting
legal structure was not well defined yet, one reason why OpenLayers
never really made an effort to move their copyright under the hood of
OSGeo. Maybe this is a chance to pick this topic up again?
My personal opinion is that the copyright of all OSGeo software should
naturally lie with OSGeo. As simple as that. I cannot see any advantage
of having the copyright elsewhere and so far nobody came up with any
good reason. But there is no hurry or pressure to do anything.
Regards,
[1] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2009-December/006471.html">http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2009-December/006471.html</a>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">There was not much discussion given such an opportunity never actually
came into existence, but there seemed to be agreement that it could
have been a good thing provided all the money gathered from the
sell would have been redirected back to the community in terms
of support, new features, and whatnot. So, an amount of money
that the PSC would have been in control on how to spend.
I might be wrong on the details, but the spirit was "it's ok
as long as money it goes back into growing the project".
The idea is, it would be a channel to allow entities that are
scared off by the GPL to support the project evolution nonetheless.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">We'd have to be careful if we go that route: "growing the project" might
have a different meaning depending on which side of the fence you sit.
For instance, I'm sure the ExtJS guys think what they're doing with
their dual license, and updates provided only to paying users [1] is in
the best interest of the project, but from my point of view (as an
outsider), they are scaring away potential contributors, and creating a
huge incentive for alternatives (such as GeojQuery to replace GeoExt
whose users are stuck with the GPL and this commercial license vs
updates issue).
[1] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.geoext.org/pipermail/dev/2009-November/000361.html">http://www.geoext.org/pipermail/dev/2009-November/000361.html</a>
My 0.02$ is that from the point of view of a private company who
controls an open source project this approach makes sense, but from the
point of view of a foundation such as OSGeo it is a no-go. Sometimes
it's tough to wear two hats and make sure we wear the right hat at the
right time.
Daniel
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="80">--
Dr. Peter Baumann
- Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann">www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann</a>
mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:p.baumann@jacobs-university.de">p.baumann@jacobs-university.de</a>
tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
- Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 147737)
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.rasdaman.com">www.rasdaman.com</a>, mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:baumann@rasdaman.com">baumann@rasdaman.com</a>
tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
"Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 10xx)
</pre>
</body>
</html>