[GRASS5] New info on openDWG

[Michael Barton]

A couple of thoughts.

Actually the Open Design Alliance licensing strategy is not all that
confusing. Basically, if you want to sell a piece of software that uses the
libraries or other utilities that they have written, you can do so. You just
need to pay them a licensing fee for making a profit from their software. If
you choose to use their software and not pay them a license fee, you cannot
sell your software either.

I don't think their license is problematic in and of itself, and thought
that this kind of license might be compatible with the way GRASS is
distributed, and worth asking about. But general consensus seems to be that
it is not compatible with the GRASS license and distribution. I think (and
told Alan) that they should update the legalese of the membership
application to better match their licensing goals as stated on their
website. However, this would not change the issues raised by many people who
responded to my question.

While it is unfortunate that GRASS cannot make use of openDWG more
extensively than it now does, I am glad that the people who create and
manage the GRASS project are conscientious enough about proper licensing to
consider this as thoroughly as they have. This is important to the people
who use GRASS. Given the many comments, it seems that the safest courses are
those Hamish mentioned, to work out something within GRASS or in OGR.
However, if there is any kind of consensus about communicating with the
alliance about ways to work with the GRASS project, I am happy to help in
any way I can since they are HQ'ed here in my neighborhood.

Michael 


On 8/30/04 3:19 AM, "Jan-Oliver Wagner" <jan at intevation.de> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 30, 2004 at 11:50:40AM +0200, Radim Blazek wrote:
>> On Friday 27 August 2004 10:36, Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
>>> talking about this 'only for non-commercial use' stuff,
>> 
>> OpenDWG lib IS NOT restricted for non-commercial use.
>> It is not possible to sell applications (SW) using OpenDWG lib,
>> which was acquired for free. It IS possible to use
>> such application for any work without other restrictions.
> 
> where do I read about the definition of 'non-commercial'?
> 
> If you find one, is it the one the license writers meant?
> And is it the one applicable for the regional law where
> someone may want to sue you?
> 
> All I am saying is that there are no answers on this and
> that you take a high risk by interpreting your acitivities
> as non-commercial yourself.
> 
> Jan
> 
> -- 
> Jan-Oliver Wagner               http://intevation.de/~jan/
> 
> Intevation GmbH                      http://intevation.de/
> FreeGIS                                http://freegis.org/
> 

____________________
C. Michael Barton, Professor
School of Human Diversity and Social Change
PO Box 872402
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ  85287-2402
USA

Phone: 480-965-6262
Fax: 480-965-7671
www: <www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton>