[Qgis-psc] Fwd: Re: Sublicence

[Richard Duivenvoorde]

On 17-10-14 00:53, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Are we able to drop the sub-licence wording please.  I find the term
> confusing and I know a lot of others that do also.  I think we should
> just stick to "permission to use logo and name".
> 
> "Permission to use logo and name" and clearer fair use rules should make
> this a lot easier to manage.   If we get questions on if you are can use
> the logo on the website to show that you are using QGIS, or are
> packaging QGIS with your data I'm worried we are doing damage to the
> project by scaring people. 

Agreed. please get rid of this licensing term. If I want to get into
that business there is another club where they are very into GIS en
licenses...

I think it was a good thing to get the trademark.

But we should really re-think (and learn from other OpenSource projects)
what it is that we really want to 'protect' OR what the real reason is
that we had to do this.

My personal feeling is that it is because we see some parasitic use of
QGIS. With which I mean (sometimes big) companies 'just taking QGIS' and
reselling or selling services without ever 'giving something back'.

I'm not sure that we can win that war with a trademark or (sub-)license.

I do not have a clear solution, but maybe better working (and hopefully
less administering work) would be if we communicate that helping the
project is 'just better' then 'only taking'.

More transparency about donations and work done, encouraging people to
ask the question "and what did you do for the project" if they take a
QGIS course somewhere or buy a service which has QGIS packaged in it.
And keep making it easier to 'give back' financially or in time.

A strong community I think is and should be better then a playing
company or lawyer.

Regards,

Richard Duivenvoorde