[Opensim-dev] Clarification on Licencing and Moving Forward as a Community

Wed Nov 3 00:19:56 UTC 2010

Forming a "legal entity" (an LLC) creates LIABILITY.  You are giving LL a
"legal entity" to sue.

At this point, LL has no one to sue/fight/shut down.  By creating a "legal
entity", you are giving LL (or whoever buys out LL in the future) a target
to fight/sue (and an opportunity to shut down "OpenSim").

"Deep pocket" Legal teams (i.e. LL) could go after OpenSim (if it were a
"legal entity).  Litigation is extremely costly, and regardless of what the
licensing is on the viewer (GPL, LGPL, etc.) there is still the legal issue
of "reverse engineering".

At this point, "OpenSim" is NOT a legal entity, and there is no real "head"
to "target" or sue (or "shut down").  By forming a LEGAL entity, you open
the whole project up to LIABILITY.  All it takes is one "cease and desist"
letter, and the whole project (and "spawn" projects) could be put in danger
(and could turn into a large and costly legal battle).

This would put EVERYONE (including all the businesses and other projects
that are based upon OpenSim core) in danger.  As the outcome of that
litigation would determine the future of ANY projects based on OpenSim.
 Sometimes it's best to just leave things the way they are.  Some may feel
that we are being "overly cautious" but there's good reason for it.  We
don't have the deep pockets for litigation that LL has, and all it takes is
a "cease and desist" letter (and threats of costly litigation) to put a
project like this under.

If we are NOT a legal "entity" then we are nothing more than individual
contributors to a "headless" open source project.  Other groups and other
projects can SPAWN off of this one, and continue to evolve (i.e. RealXtend,
ScienceSim, etc.).

Anyone can take the OpenSim core, and form their own new project.  They can
write/add code, and make their own modules/source freely available (just
like RealXtend or ScienceSim, etc.)

> and should be done immediately before communities branch off on the
> assumption that the OpenSim policy will continue to exclude them.

There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with "communities" branching off of
OpenSim (i.e. RealXtend, ScienceSim, etc.)  This keeps the OpenSim "core"
community safe, and innovative development work done at various community
"branches" and innovative ideas can always be shared or eventually fed back
to core.

Creative "innovation" is a good thing, but by allowing people to work on (or
view) the LL Viewer source code, and then work on OpenSim server (without a
6-month "breather" period) you are ultimately poisoning the whole OpenSim
project by ALLOWING contributors to "reverse engineer" the LL Server.  (Thus
opening up the whole project AND all other spawn projects to LEGAL
LIABILITY).

Regardless of what "license" a Viewer source is (GPL, LGPL,etc.), by
enforcing a 6-month "breather" period, you are ensuring that you are not
"contaminating" the OpenSim Server project by contributing server code (that
could be developed or influenced by viewing the source code of LL's Second
Life Viewer).

*"You have not studied source code from the GPL Second Life viewer or its
derivatives within the last 6 months."** *

Keep in mind that LL's server code is Intellectual Property, and it is NOT
open source, or freely available.

Regardless of what "license" the LL Viewer is, that really has nothing to do
with protecting the OpenSim server core from being "tainted" by anyone
having viewed the LL Server source, or LL Viewer Source, while contributing
code to OpenSim Server.

Allowing contributors to view Second Life Viewer source and work on OpenSim
server, without a "6-month" breather period could put the whole project in
jeopardy as contributor's could be "influenced" by LL and Second Life's
viewer source code (thus "reverse engineering" LL's server).

Ultimately the "community" needs to develop new viewers that are written
from the ground up completely independent of LL and Second Life (i.e. Naali,
etc.)

This 6-month "breathing period" is a reasonable effort to ensure that
developers that are contributing code to OpenSim Server are NOT "reverse
engineering" LL's server code, nor are they "influenced" by viewing the LL
viewer source, and then adding/developing features into the OpenSim Server
code based on the LL viewer source (ultimately "reverse engineering" LL's
server code).

It would be EXTREMELY difficult to prove that we are NOT "reverse
engineering" LL's server if we are in fact allowing contributors to view
Second Life Viewer source code, while developing a server that acts, looks,
and behaves like Second Life (and even allows for LSL scripting).

*> You have not witnessed, seen or been party to the development of the *
*> official Linden Lab Server Software.*

This statement is there for a reason.

*> You have not studied source code from the GPL Second Life viewer or *
*> its derivatives within the last 6 months.*

This statement is there for a reason as well.  The OpenSim project MUST
ensure that contributors are NOT "reverse engineering" LL's server code by
viewing any LL/Second Life Viewer or Server source, and that their
contributions to OpenSim core are ORIGINAL and NOT being influenced by
viewing any LL source code.

It's difficult to say that this is true if you allow contributers to view
LL's source code, and work on OpenSim server (without a 6-month "quarantine"
period").  This is an Intellectual Property issue, not a "GPL" licensing
issue.

> I think a change of policy is now possible

OpenSim is too much like another large company's product (Second Life).  The
6-month "quarantine" period is to help protect the OpenSim project from the
threat of litigation.  A "change of policy" will NEVER be possible, unless
EVERY developer working on OpenSim can get a waiver from Linden Lab
disclaiming ANY interest in your contributions.

Keep in mind that Linden Lab's server code is NOT GPL or LGPL (nor is it
"open source").  If Linden Lab refuses to make their LL server source code
public or "open source" then clearly Linden Lab doesn't want any
"competitors" to get an economic advantage over Linden Lab (or it's Second
Life server product).

Developing an "open source" competing server product (OpenSim) by allowing
developers to view LL's Viewer Source code (while contributing to OpenSim)
would/could be viewed as "reverse engineering" LL's server code.  As it
stands, the 6-month "quarantine" period should be fairly sufficient to
prevent anyone from "reverse engineering" or "copying" or "remembering" any
of LL's intellectual property.

Unless developer's working on OpenSim (and viewing LL's source code) can get
a waiver from Linden Lab disclaiming ANY interest in your contributions,
it's NOT wise to endanger the whole OpenSim project by allowing contributors
to view Second Life Viewer source code, while contributing to OpenSim server
project.

On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 4:08 AM, Ai Austin <ai.ai.austin at gmail.com> wrote:

> At 00:46 02/11/2010, Crista Lopes <lopes at ics.uci.edu> wrote:
>
>> Whatever the original legal advice was, it resulted in the current rules
>> described here:
>> http://opensimulator.org/wiki/Contributions_Policy
>>
>> For the past year or so, we have been consulting informally with a lawyer
>> based in San Diego who is very much inside the issues. When we inquired
>> about relaxing the restrictive rules, including the 6-month quarantine, he
>> reinforced the need for those rules.
>>
>
>
> The policy as written assumes GPL Second Life Viewer code, which of course
> has now changed to LGPL. That makes all the difference.  I totally agree we
> cannot accept contributions based on any virally defined GPL code base, as
> the contributions policy very appropriately states, and should continue to
> state.
>
> I personally don't think a lawyer is needed to read and act on LGPL... and
> don't see what we gain by having them read things given that we act as
> individuals and not a LLC anyway.  But if any lawyer gave input out of the
> goodness of their heart, the main question is whether they gave advice on
> the basis of the change of licence terms (already in place) for the SL
> Viewer code which was announced a few months ago and is now within the last
> month implemented by a change of the licence file within the viewer sources.
>
> That's why I think a change of policy is now possible, and should be done
> immediately before communities branch off on the assumption that the OpenSim
> policy will continue to exclude them.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20101102/3a9e71a4/attachment-0001.html>