|
|
Home | Switchboard | Unix Administration | Red Hat | TCP/IP Networks | Neoliberalism | Toxic Managers |
| (slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and bastardization of classic Unix | |||||||
| Main page | Ebook | Reference | Recommended papers | BSD License | Artistic License | GPL |
| Shareware & Giftware | Framing | Plagiarism | Random Findings | Humor | Etc |
General information about copyrights a FAQ from Oppedahl & Larson LLP. (1998)
OpenCode--Berkman Center for Internet and Society -- still pretty raw, mostly pro-GNU stance.
Welcome to opencode.org, a new consortium of entrepreneurial people and institutions wanting to create a space for open software, open research, and open content. We invite in-person and electronic participation by anyone who would like to become part of opencode's founding.
GigaLaw.com A Software Copyright Primer (Page 1 of 8)
Different Kinds of Freedom -- debian page. contain some information and links to the following licenses:
Association of Shareware Professionals
The Open Source Initiative Licenses -- contains templates for several less popular licenses
THE POWER OF OPENNESS - A Critique and a Proposal for The H20 Project
REFLAW Intellectual Property & Copyright & Patents & Law & Legal
Patent, Copyright and Trademark -- from Legal Encyclopedia includes useful info on software copyright
U.S. Copyright Law - Cornell
The World Wide Web Virtual Library Law Intellectual Property -- Indiana University
PARIS CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY OF MARCH 20, 1883, as revised in 1967
University Business Policy 2550 - Software Copyrights and Piracy
This is the simplest of free/open source licenses. Essentially this is a codification of the idea of "pro-bono" work. there are two major flavors of he BSD license:
Excerpt from http://www.OpenBSD.ORG/policy.html
The GNU Public License and licenses modeled on it impose the restriction that source code must be distributed or made available for all works that are derivatives of the GNU copyrighted code.
While this may be a noble strategy in terms of software sharing, it is a condition that is typically unacceptable for commercial use of software. As a consequence, software bound by the GPL terms can not be included in the kernel or "runtime" of OpenBSD, though software subject to GPL terms may be included as development tools or as part of the system that are "optional" as long as such use does not result in OpenBSD as a whole becoming subject to the GPL terms.
As an example, some ports include GNU Floating Point Emulation - this is optional and the system can be built without it or with an alternative emulation package. Another example is the use of GCC and other GNU tools in the OpenBSD tool chain - it is quite possible to distribute a system for many applications without a tool chain, or the distributor can choose to include a tool chain as an optional bundle which conforms to the GPL terms.
The BSD License Problem (also http---www.gnu.org.-philosophy-bsd.html) -- on BSD-license advertising clause'
Apache Server License -- BSD style that enforce commented block at the beginning of each source file.
Most free software for MS-DOS, Windows and Macintosh computers is distributed under principles of shareware which is a very influential movement of its own. One of the founders of the shareware concept, Bob Wallace left Microsoft in 1983 (the same year as Stallman started GNU project). Wallace had written a basic word processing program called PC-WRITE and (after a contest was held in 1984 to settle on a name for this new distribution method. The most popular choice was "shareware") started referring to his product as "shareware." Wallace stated that "My philosophy is that I want to make a living, not a killing." In early 1987, Bob attended the pivotal Houston conference of virtually all of the top shareware programmers in those days. From that meeting, the Association of Shareware Professionals was formed. At its peak, his company QuickSoft employed over 30 people and did over $2 million a year in business, with over 45,000 registered users.
Shareware is copyrighted by the author and should include an explicit license that sets out the terms under which you can use the software. Shareware licenses typically grant you the right to use the unregisted version of software without any payments as well as redistribute it in unmodified form. sometimes it sets conditions under which you should cease using evaluation copy and must buy a licensed copy of the software. In the latter case evaluation version is granted for a month of free use or on conditions that you can only use it for non-commercial purposes. The shareware version may also have limitations which do not apply to the registered version: typically it may display nagging messages asking you to register.
Some shareware authors aren't really interested in money, but use the shareware model to track the spread of their software. These authors typically request payment in the form of a postcard, or perhaps just offer free email registration; such software may be called freeware or giftware.
Shareware is usually distributed in binary form only and the user normally has no way of adapting or using it in other work other than those provided by the original author, nor any right to do so; once the author leaves the field or abandons the software, further development of the software usually stops.
The shareware model is attractive to PC developers because it takes the burden of distributing and packaging software (by far the most expensive part of publishing software) off of the developer, and some companies (like McAfee, PKWare, WinZip and many others) have based entire businesses around the shareware model. Shareware provides sustainable business model and some shareware companies had grown to a significant size (McAfee).
ASP-compliant products are shareware products, produced by ASP Developer Members, that satisfy all the requirements in this document. Only ASP- compliant products may use the ASP logo or Ombudsman statement. Only ASP-compliant products may refer to the ASP -- whether in the product, documentation, or marketing materials -- in any way that might reasonably be interpreted as suggesting ASP compliance. ASP-compliant shareware products must be created and marketed in a professional manner. ASP Developer Members must treat the user of the product and the concept of shareware with courtesy and respect.
An ASP-compliant product may limit the user evaluation period. If such limitation is used, the product must allow users access to the features customary or reasonable for that type of product for a time period or number of uses sufficient to allow adequate evaluation by the user. An ASP-compliant product may also use other limiting measures. Such measures must not unduly interfere with the evaluation of the product. Users must be notified, while using the program, of the impending expiration of the evaluation period. This notification must occur well in advance of any disabling of features or cessation of program operation. All limiting measures must be documented, and such notification must refer to that documentation. Users obtaining the shareware version of an ASP-compliant product from any source approved by the developer must be able to install and use the product for the full evaluation period.
Registration Reminder Screens may be used in an ASP-compliant product. Such Registration Reminder Screens must not unduly interfere with the evaluation of the product during the initial evaluation period.
An ASP-compliant product must be substantially complete, and accurately represent the registered version, except in cases where a substantially complete product would provide little or no reason for the user to register and pay for the product. Examples include some games, source code for programmer's tools, electronically published books, fonts, and clip art collections. In those cases, a portion of the product allowing adequate evaluation of the product may be distributed. A Non Shareware Version (NSV) of an ASP-compliant product, which includes advanced features, may also be offered, in addition to the normal registered version.
When, during evaluation of an ASP-compliant product, a user creates data that have substantial independent value, the product shall not prevent some form of access to those data even after the expiration of the evaluation period. Such access may or may not require further use of the product itself.
One thing that you can do is put this little bit of Javascript at the top of each page:
top.location.target="_top"
if(window.location.target != "_top") {
top.location.href=window.location.href }
This will break you out of anyone's frames. Frankly, it's just not right to link to someone else's content within your frameset to make it look like their content is your work.
See also an excellent collection of links: Cyberspace Law - Linking and Framing
-- "Getting framed" refers to the technique of using an existing frameset to display someone else's document against his wishes into the current display. This can happen quite easily if one of the documents in the frames uses a link that does not use the TARGET attribute, as the destination of that link will be displayed in the current frame. To avoid "framing" other people's documents, you must add TARGET="_top" to all links that lead to documents outside your intended scope.
The GPL's main purpose is to make all software free "This page explains why the GPL contains some requirements that makes it hard to use in the real world".
Caldera to introduce modified open-source license
"Love said he thinks Microsoft was right in its claim that the GPL doesn't make much business sense. Consequently, Caldera is likely to add a non-GPL licensing mechanism -- most likely one based on the BSD license -- to its repertoire in the coming months."
"Specifically, he thinks that, for commercial programmers and independent software vendors (ISVs), the GPL license, by requiring any code changes made to GPLed code, like Linux, can interfere with an ISV's business "
A small point on Open Source vs. Free Software
"We are talking about the GPL: the GNU General Public License. This is not an Open Source license; it is a Free Software license. The purpose of it is to eliminate proprietary software. "
"As Richard Stallman himself says: "In the GNU Project, discrimination against proprietary software is not just a policy--it's the principle and the purpose." "
The GPL is not open source (2)
"The GPL is explicitly discriminatory and explicitly anti-business, as is reflected by the quote above and also by its effects on programmers and their businesses. My personal ethical code will not allow me to support such a thing."
"But the GPL prevented them from creating an improved version of the software to sell the hardware."
"The GPL was created to protect against such un-ethical behavior, but let's face it, if people are going to be un-ethical enough to blatantly steal from Open Source, you can also trust them to be un-ethical enough to not care for the license. At the end of the day, the license is nothing but words that can be easily ignored."
LinuxPlanet - Judgment Day for the GPL - Determining the Legality of the GPL
This summer could be a lot hotter than usual--not because of global warming, which may or may not be taking place, but because of a lawsuit which may or may not be taking place.
Before summer's end, a long-awaited court test of the GNU General Public License may be filed, says Eben Moglen, professor at the Columbia University Law School and general counsel to the Free Software Foundation.
"If you wait another couple of months I wouldn't be surprised if you see either a lawsuit or a voluntary agreement to comply entered into by a major international software house that has done exactly what you postulate, less in the 'embrace and extend' model than in the 'security through obscurity' model, which is another reason why those who build works on top of free software sometimes try not to disclose source," Moglen told me in an e-mail exchange dealing with the basic nature of the GPL, the licensing instrument of much if not most Linux-related software. (I had asked him whether it would be possible for a commercial software firm to envelop GPLed code, alter it, and sell it, sans source code, and whether it would be possible to obtain judicial relief under such circumstances.)
Moglen would not reveal the details of the potential lawsuit, nor would he name the company involved, noting that if he did he would reduce the likelihood that court could be avoided.
... ... ...
This won't necessarily happen in the first case, right out of the box. This has to do with the nature of the case itself--again, the FSF is smart enough to choose a test case that it is likely to win--and other factors that cannot be predicted at all. Because it will probably result in new law, random factors such as the judge assigned to the case, his or her mood and opinion of the lawyers involved, and competence of his or her law clerk are huge and unpredictable variables.
"It's going to be interesting" one lawyer told me. "It's just a different paradigm entirely."
(Moglen's manifesto, "Anarchism Triumphant: Free Software and the Death of the Copyright," can be found at http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/my_pubs/anarchism.html. In it, he argues for the elimination of intellectual property rights. It is a very interesting read, just as it is useful for the reader to contemplate whether the elimination of intellectual property rights is necessarily a good thing.)
The Napster Revolution and the Law
Linux Today - GNU libc 2.2.4 Release Notes Include Hard Words for Richard Stallman
Kenneth Bernholm - Subject: Have a little faith ( Aug 17, 2001, 13:46:21 ) It's sad to see so many people speak out against the GPL, GNU, RMS and FSF. If it weren't for RMS' dissatisfaction with the state of things in his MIT days (go to gnu.org to read about the Xerox printer affair), there would be no barricades against M$ and AOL and the likes today.
Personally, I feel confident that the FSF will fight tooth and claw when somebody tries to take official GNU packages away (by forking, embrace-and-extending or by other means). The glibc is such an official GNU package.
Let me quote from gnu.org:
"The GNU C library was originally written and maintained primarily by Roland McGrath when he worked for the FSF. During the development of version 2, Ulrich Drepper volunteered his efforts and became the foremost contributor. Ulrich took over as the maintainer when Roland left the FSF, and made the releases of versions 2.0 and later."
I believe a man like Drepper to be highly intelligent not to enter a working relationship with his eyes closed. If he cannot agree with the FSF anymore, maybe it's time for him to move on.
Personally, I compile my operating system software from official GNU packages when at all possible. I can't wait till Hurd is stable so I can dump Linux (not that Linux isn't a fine piece of work).
You might call me a purist (and worse things), but I believe in FSF/RMS/GPL/GNU and I know that they're not compromising. The GNU OS will stay free and FSF has the capacity to make it so.
And BSD? It's a beautiful system, but when The Man can swipe the code and use it against the developers, it's a license I'll never support. It's simple as that.
Everybody! Free Software is about *freedom*. Let's not forget that in all our squabbles. And then let's have a little faith in those who have dedicated their lives to free us from the tyranny of corporations and governements.
I for one am tired of being treated like a mindless piece of livestock by those in power.
And perhaps most importantly: I do not mind if you have a different opinion that mine. As long as we can agree that no opinion is the only right opinion.
Leo - Subject: GPL is a *great* license, regardless of who RMS is ( Aug 17, 2001, 04:01:05 ) OK, I am noticing attacks on GPL that have nothing to do with GPL itself but rather with the RMS's character. That's just retardation people.
GPL and LGPL are great licenses, and this has nothing to do with RMS. RMS could become Stalin-line tomorrow morning, and this wouldn't change the fact that GPL is a great license. The only questionable piece is the "or any later version" clause. But without that clause, the actual spirit of GPL is flawless.
You can knock that one clause, but you can't complain about the spirit of GPL and Free Software. Or at the very least, your complaint would have nothing to do with RMS himself, if there was any validity to it whatsoever.
And, also, BSD license sucks. The reason why was already discussed to death: it allows powerful companies to wrest the control of the software from you via an embrace-and-extend attack. You can own your BSD licensed software, but your ownership of it can become irrelevant if some company with majority market share extends it into an incompatible, but much much more popular version. At the very least, you wind up aiding and abetting a known criminal. Why give free help to a bunch of criminals? Keep your guns locked up.
Leo - Subject: the truth lies somewhere in the middle ( Aug 17, 2001, 03:47:24 ) I think one one hand, Drepper has a point about the "or any later version" clause. Drepper might also have a point about Stallman being rude and forceful (if it can be verified).
But... Without some of those very same RMS qualities, Free Software movement wouldn't be here today in the form that we see. And for that, no matter what you think about RMS currently, we are in debt to RMS.
Also, all the writings and speaches by RMS are very very well thought out, clear, and to the point.
Since I don't know RMS personally, it's not up to me to judge his character on a personal level, as Drepper has done. From where I sit, I see RMS as a human being. He's got some good and some bad. But it looks to me like he's got more good in him than most other software professionals. In terms of coding, he's done his share of contributing, so he deserves the right to opine on the coding effort. Drepper and others might not agree with his estimation, but RMS sure deserves to speak his piece.
I wouldn't be surprised if RMS had some nasty compulsive-obsessive habbit and a controlling streak. But so do many other people (and some good people among them too).
My personal suggestion to RMS is that he needs to relax a little and stop running around as if a bee stung his behind. He just needs to get more laid back and more sagely, and speak only on rare occasions. At this point, I think everything that needs to be said by RMS was already said. If someone of RMS's stature keeps talking too much, he can only harm his cause by cheapening it with too much verbiage. Too much verbiage can be OK for a non-famous person, but for someone like RMS, who gets scrutinized constantly, it's a big drawback.
This especially applies getting involved in politically irrelevant exchanges about things like glibc. RMS needs to trust the community he has created with things like glibc. If RMS can't trust the community, then why is he still alive? He made the community what they are. If people are consciously aware of their rights, it is because RMS has raised the level of consciousness. He should be happy that Drepper won't let anyone take him for a ride :). Just imagine, instead of RMS it could have been M$. You have to put the trust in every single individual of the community, instead of one community "leader". Any good leader will know this. Didn't RMS read Dune?
RMS will have to step aside at some point anyway. I think RMS should contemplate that all things are impermanent, and that greed often destroys the greedy, no matter whether they are greedy for money or immaterial things. There is a healthy amount for everything.
Disclaimer: this is just my opinion at *this* point in time. It is liable to change as I get more information.
Society
Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers : Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy
Quotes
War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes : Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce : Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes
Bulletin:
Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law
History:
Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds : Larry Wall : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS : Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development : Scripting Languages : Perl history : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history
Classic books:
The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month : How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite
Most popular humor pages:
Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor
The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D
Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
|
|
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site |
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.
Last modified: March 12, 2019
