From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id SAA19166; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:14:05 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA18987 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:14:04 +0100 (MET) Received: from epexch01.qlogic.org ([63.170.40.3]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h0KHE3v02496 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:14:04 +0100 (MET) Received: from epmailtmp.qlogic.org ([10.20.33.254]) by epexch01.qlogic.org with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:14:11 -0600 Received: from [10.20.33.146] ([10.20.33.146]) by epmailtmp.qlogic.org with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:14:10 -0600 Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:22:54 -0600 (CST) From: Brian Hurt X-X-Sender: Reply-To: Brian Hurt To: Matt Gushee cc: Ocaml Mailing List Subject: Re: License wars (was Re: [Caml-list] ANN: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web) In-Reply-To: <20030120164653.GA6351@swordfish> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Jan 2003 17:14:10.0718 (UTC) FILETIME=[5920ABE0:01C2C0A7] Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Matt Gushee wrote: > But quite apart from wanting to keep open (for myself) the option of > using my code in a proprietary app, IANAL, but I do hang out with an IP lawyer, and as I understand it if it's 100% your code you can do whatever the heck with it you like. You own the copyright. Everyone else is bound to the GPL (unless you decide to release it under another license), but *you* are not. Mind you, this only applies if it's 100% your code. If you accept a patch from me, for example, then I own part of the copyright as well, and you have to get my agreement to change the license on my code/patch. For large projects with lots of involved people (like Linux) it becomes effectively impossible to change the license. I generally perfer the GPL, *because* I'm a professional programmer. As the saying goes, I have to put food on the table as well. If you want to use my code, pay me for it- either money (code for hire), or payment in kind. Which is basically what the GPL is. The payment to use (modify) my code is that I get some of your code. Don't like the deal? Don't use the code. Write your own code. But I'm not religous about it. I strongly beleive that the guy writting the code- the guy putting the sweat equity in to create the value- gets to decide what sort of license it goes under. Note that by choosing to extend, and thereby reuse most of, GPL licensed code you are choosing you license. This can be viewed both as an advantage (everyone else has to play under the same rules you play under) and as a disadvantage (you have to play under the same rules everyone else plays under). Note the same can be said about the BSD license- it's both an advantage and a disadvantage. It is, however, your choice. And compared to some of the EULAs that various commercial companies are foisting off, there's almost no difference. Brian ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners