[Opensim-dev] GPL / BSD licensing dangers

[Mark Malewski]

Neil,

It's not rocket science.  Try to work with one, or the other, but not both.

*> **OpenSIM core can't include GPL'd code into the *
*> BSD licensed core*

That's the gist of it all.

If you're going to do any viewer work, then maybe look at Naali.  It's a
BSD-licensed viewer, and you can work on both the viewer and server without
any fear.

http://wiki.realxtend.org/index.php/Getting_Started_with_Naali

*> Maybe that needs to be broadened and the reasons added?*

We're not legal counsel.

http://opendevice.blogspot.com/2007/06/best-gnu-gpl-vs-bsd-comparison-ever.html

BSD license retains the freedom to incorporate the code into proprietary
products (without making the products open source), and that's a freedom
which the GPL does not allow.

http://slashdot.org/articles/99/06/23/1313224.shtml

You can't sell GPL'd software.  You can charge for distribution, support, or
documentation, but can't charge for the software itself.  BSD license allows
developers much more flexibility in how they plan on using the software
(commercial, non-commercial, etc.)

<http://opendevice.blogspot.com/2007/06/best-gnu-gpl-vs-bsd-comparison-ever.html>
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html

*The BSD license places minimal restrictions on future behavior. This allows
BSD code to remain Open Source or become integrated into commercial
solutions, as a project's or company's needs change. In other words, the BSD
license does not become a legal time-bomb at any point in the development
process.*

*In addition, since the BSD license does not come with the legal complexity
of the GPL or LGPL licenses, it allows developers and companies to spend
their time creating and promoting good code rather than worrying if that
code violates licensing.*
Read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License

As a developer, you should KNOW whether you are copying someone else's work.
 Just don't do it.

As far as keeping things "simple", that is why we try to draw a line in the
sand, and say that OS core server developers (BSD license) should avoid
looking at any LL viewer code.

If you're going to be working with LL viewer code, then you can write your
own modules, but just stay away from core.  If you want to work on BOTH core
and viewer, then work on Naali.  Naali has been written from the ground up,
with a BSD license to overcome all the problems various groups were
facing/having when it comes to licensing issues.

So if you really want to work on both a viewer and server, then just work on
Naali.

http://wiki.realxtend.org/index.php/Getting_Started_with_Naali

*> **If I misread I apologize, again its why I asked for *
*> clarification. *
*
*
No problem.
*
*
*> **Thanks for the reference.*

No problem.  If you're going to develop, just be responsible.  Please
understand that Diva (and all the core dev's) are simply just protecting the
project from any "tainting".  We can't offer you any legal advice, but
that's why it's quite common for the dev's to ask that you work on one or
the other (but not both).

The best solution is to just work on the Naali viewer.  If you want to work
on both a viewer, and the server core, then look at Naali.  They're both
BSD-license based, and it solves any problems with licensing "issues".

If you're going to write your own modules, then you may do as you wish
(because you'll be responsible for what you do on your own).

*> **I asked for clarification because honestly I'd like *
*> to be able to contribute and can't with the current *
*> restrictions.    It is what it is. *

It "is what it is" for a reason.

*> **I'd like **to be able to contribute and can't with the current *
*> restrictions. *

The core dev's are simply just protecting the project (from a legal
standpoint), and that's the problem we face with two incompatible licenses
(GPL vs BSD).  So if you want to work on both a viewer and the server, then
it would be best to begin looking at the Naali Viewer (BSD license based).
 You can work on both the server and Naali viewer code (both are BSD
licensed) without any fear of "contaminating" either project.


On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Neil Canham <neil at knowsense.co.uk> wrote:

> OK, suitably chastened, I've read the wiki now :-)  The closest it comes to
> what seems to be the consensus here is:
>
> "You have not studied source code from the GPL Second Life viewer or its
> derivatives within the last 6 months."
>
> Maybe that needs to be broadened and the reasons added?  I'm happy to do it
> but given that I'm getting everything from you guys it might suffer for
> being second hand.
>
> Neil
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20100630/35137013/attachment-0001.html>