 |
I Am Not A Lawyer
This is not legal advice
Copyright law applies
You can use it if you have a copy
You cannot give a copy to anyone
You cannot make copies
You cannot copy (substantial) portions
You cannot make modifications
Fair Use rights are quite vague
Section 107 lists fair uses:
Criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research
Section 107 lists factors to be considered in determining fair use:
Purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature
Nature of the copyrighted work
Amount and substantiality of the portion used
Effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work
Not covered by copyright
Likewise, reading (using) a book is not covered by copyright
Commercial licenses often require you to give up some usage rights
Free / Open Source licenses NEVER require you to give up usage rights
-
The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements (and modified versions in general) to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
-
Similar in purpose (and implementation) to Free Software Definition
Free Redistribution
Source Code
Derived Works
Integrity of The Author's Source Code
No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
Distribution of License
License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
License Must Not Restrict Other Software
License Must Be Technology-Neutral
Free Software emphasizes freedom
Open Source emphasizes low cost, flexibility, control
Freedom and control are 2 sides of the same coin
Other similar terms
I will use the terms interchangeably
LGPL - like GPL, but allows linking to non- GPL code
MIT - basically the same as 2-clause BSD
-
-
Sun, IBM licenses
Not a license, per se
Government works
Works whose copyright terms have expired
Controversy whether you can explicitly make something public domain
Author has NO rights to the work
Microsoft's attempt to blunt Open Source
Didn't work too well - doesn't grant enough to be useful
Microsoft now has 2 OSI-approved licenses
Microsoft now using a few Open Source licenses for some things
WIX installer
-
WPF
Power Toys
IronPython
Apache support
-
When using other code within your own, you create a derived work.
Must have some sort of permission to create the derived work.
Must make sure you follow the license terms of the code you use.
For GPL licensed code, you must make your code GPL as well.
For BSD licenses, you need not make your own code BSD.
GPL license requires code you combine to be GPL
FSF keeps a list of GPL-compatible licenses
GPLv2 and GPLv3 have some compatibility issues
BSD licenses allow you to use code under non-BSD licenses
Some code can be dual licensed
FLOSS-like licenses for other things exist
-
-
Actual damages
Potential for punitive damages, if you intentionally keep violating copyright
Potential for statutory damages
Injunction preventing you from distributing potentially infringing code
Profits you've made from the infringing material
Trademark
Patents
Applies to inventions, methods, processes
Software patents are a legal minefield
Recent rulings have lessened scope of some patents
If you're just using Open Source - no worries
If you're just distributing unmodified Open Source - no worries
If you're distributing modified Open Source with source code - no worries
If you're mixing Open Source with proprietary extensions - talk to a lawyer
Unless the Open Source code is BSD or MIT, then just ensure proper attribution
Read the licenses - GPL, BSD, Microsoft EULAs
Read the copyright laws
-
-
Copyright 2003, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 by Craig M. Buchek. Some Rights Reserved.
-
|
 |