|
Author
|
Message
|
|
Zak Greant
|
Wednesday 23 November 2005 5:31:01 am
Dear Tomislav, The person or group who holds the copyright on a specific piece of software can assign some of their rights to others using licenses and/or contracts. Unless the license or contract is exclusive, the copyright holder can choose to share the same rights (and make restrictions on use) with different people in different ways. The licenses are individisible sets of terms and conditions - ie. you get this right, if - and only if - you do that thing. Wikipedia has good resources on this topic, but be prepared to spend a few hours or more reading. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright As for the issue of dual-licensing and how it fits in with the Free Software (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) and Open Source definitions (http://opensource.org/docs/definition.php) - there is no conflict. The presence of non-Free, non-Open licensing for a product does not invalidate or conflict with the Free and Open licensing of a product. Users who wish to ignore the proprietary licensing of a product are free to use the Free/Open version instead. Cheers!
|
|
Piotrek Karaś
|
Tuesday 04 December 2007 10:36:12 am
In the extension context...
<b>Paul Borgermans</b> wrote:
<i>If you develop extensions under the GPL, you are not required to redistribute them ... but that's unfair towards the community unless they are irrelevant.</i> While I agree with the second part, is that really so with the first one? I'm getting little lost taking my first steps in extension authoring under GPL... What about derivative work license text parts?
I have just discovered FAQ page: http://ez.no/ezpublish/faq (hard to find ;)
It mentions three different extension types: simple extensions, design extensions and modules. It explains what these are in simple technical terms, but how does this division actually translate into GPL? Which of these types are considered derivative work, that require actual further extension redistribution? I hope that design implementation doesn't fall within that type ;)
Grateful for any help,
Piotrek
--
Company: mediaSELF Sp. z o.o., http://www.mediaself.pl
eZ references: http://ez.no/partners/worldwide_partners/mediaself
eZ certified developer: http://ez.no/certification/verify/272585
eZ blog: http://ez.ryba.eu
|
|
Zak Greant
|
Tuesday 04 December 2007 12:32:30 pm
Hi Piotrek, The GPL isn't a mechanism to force people to share. Instead, it is a way to help ensure that when people receive code, that they receive all of the rights that they need to be able to run, study, modify and share the code (or works based on the code.) eZ's preference is that people give (or sell) Free/Open source code to each other. We recommend buying an eZ license if you do not want to do this. Even if your design is GPL-licensed, you can sell it. You just need to make sure that the people who purchase it understand that they are free to redistribute it or sell it. If your design extension uses GPL-licensed code, is distributed with eZ Publish and only works with eZ Publish, we definitely consider that to be a derivative work. If your design extension works with a few different CMS systems, doesn't contain any GPL-licensed code and isn't distributed with eZ Publish, it probably is not a derivative work.
Cheers!
--zak
|
|
Piotrek Karaś
|
Tuesday 04 December 2007 2:01:39 pm
Thanks Zak, This clarifies things a bit. Still, what if I develop GPL-licensed project-dedicated extension with little or no flexibility... in other words - one that is of little or no use to other people/community. Should I publish it at ez.no contributions? Should I redistribute it in any special way?
Greetings,
Piotrek
--
Company: mediaSELF Sp. z o.o., http://www.mediaself.pl
eZ references: http://ez.no/partners/worldwide_partners/mediaself
eZ certified developer: http://ez.no/certification/verify/272585
eZ blog: http://ez.ryba.eu
|
|
Zak Greant
|
Tuesday 04 December 2007 4:08:04 pm
Hi Piotrek, Even simple code can help novices learn how to solve similar problems. :)
Cheers!
--zak
|
|
Piotrek Karaś
|
Tuesday 04 December 2007 9:58:12 pm
Hi Zak, Don't get me wrong, I totally agree, especially in the context of little hacks and improvements. I also don't have a problem with GPL as such, I do feel I owe back to eZ community and like the philosophy behind it, and hope that sometime I will be eZ literate enough to contribute valuable pieces of code. But now as I'm taking my first steps with extensions I can see, that one gets a completely new set of possibilities in reach. Because of raw PHP access and separation from the core installation, it may be an extremely elegant, flexible and effective method of solving common problems and enhancing functionalities. But, also it may be very tempting to code project-dedicated solutions in a way, that will be difficult to reconfigure or reuse, in a number of ways. As a result, one may end up with lots of different extensions written for a whole range of unique purposes, or sometimes one huge extension to solve multiple problems of one project. Let's forget about bad practice side of some of those scenarios for a sec. What would be your legal/practical advice about redistribution of such stuff? Also, are there any materials available on what's the procedure to certify extensions? Thanks
--
Company: mediaSELF Sp. z o.o., http://www.mediaself.pl
eZ references: http://ez.no/partners/worldwide_partners/mediaself
eZ certified developer: http://ez.no/certification/verify/272585
eZ blog: http://ez.ryba.eu
|
|
Zak Greant
|
Tuesday 04 December 2007 10:19:43 pm
Hi Piotrek, I can't give legal advice - I'm not a lawyer. As for practical advice, what do you want to do with the extensions? It is hard to give practical advice without knowing this.
Cheers!
--zak
|
|
Piotrek Karaś
|
Wednesday 05 December 2007 10:55:53 pm
Hello Zak, Let's say a client with GPL-licensed eZ Publish installation requires some new functionality. I cannot offer to sell such an extension under GPL, but what it seems to me I can do is to prepare such extension with him financing my work. After I release the extension under GPL, he's free to use it, as long as he adheres to and accepts GPL. If the above is correct, than I expect some of such extensions to be a new quality to the community (poll, connector, etc...), which deserves sharing and distributing; other may be of little use to others (module that does some calculations based on unique content classes).
--
Company: mediaSELF Sp. z o.o., http://www.mediaself.pl
eZ references: http://ez.no/partners/worldwide_partners/mediaself
eZ certified developer: http://ez.no/certification/verify/272585
eZ blog: http://ez.ryba.eu
|
|
Zak Greant
|
Wednesday 05 December 2007 11:37:08 pm
Hi Piotrek, > I cannot offer to sell such an extension under GPL, Why not? :) (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html)
> but what it seems to me I can do is to prepare such extension with him financing my work.
> After I release the extension under GPL, he's free to use it, as long as he adheres to and accepts
> GPL. This is perfectly acceptable as well.
Cheers!
--zak
|
|
Piotrek Karaś
|
Thursday 06 December 2007 12:38:30 am
Well, slowly getting a clearer picture of the entire GPL idea... ;) However, that still leaves my last question unanswered: should I actively share all of my work or maybe some things I should only make available from my website? What about on-demand model?
Doesn't what you wrote/sent:
<i>> Why not? :) (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html)</i>
indicate, that actually on-demand model is perfectly OK?
Let's ask it practical way:
I have an extension which I want to distribute under GPL license. I may choose not to redistribute it within the community for free and set a price for it, but once someone buys it, (s)he may use it with all the rights and restrictions of GPL. And as soon as my client expects a proprietary license, I use eZPEL? Would that be right? PS. Sorry if my thinking is slow ;) I like precise formulas, like: if($x) {$y...} ;) Besides, writing an extension now, difficult to pause ;)
--
Company: mediaSELF Sp. z o.o., http://www.mediaself.pl
eZ references: http://ez.no/partners/worldwide_partners/mediaself
eZ certified developer: http://ez.no/certification/verify/272585
eZ blog: http://ez.ryba.eu
|
|
Zak Greant
|
Thursday 06 December 2007 1:09:13 am
Hi Piotrek,
> However, that still leaves my last question unanswered: should I actively share all of my
> work or maybe some things I should only make available from my website? What about
> on-demand model? I'd do both. Give some things away - this helps the community and helps you by raising your profile and getting you links and recognition. Sell some things - it helps your wallet and keeps you programming. :)
> Doesn't what you wrote/sent:
> Why not? :) (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html)
> indicate, that actually on-demand model is perfectly OK? It is. The GPL isn't a tool to force people to give their work away - instead, it is a way to make sure that people have control over the software that matters to them.
> I have an extension which I want to distribute under GPL license. I may choose not to
> redistribute it within the community for free and set a price for it, but once someone buys it,
> (s)he may use it with all the rights and restrictions of GPL. Correct.
> And as soon as my client expects a
> proprietary license, I use eZPEL? Would that be right? Yep.
> PS. Sorry if my thinking is slow ;) I like precise formulas, like: if($x) {$y...} ;) Besides, writing
> an extension now, difficult to pause ;) No worries! :)
Cheers!
--zak
|
|
Piotrek Karaś
|
Thursday 06 December 2007 1:16:58 am
Uffff... getting home ;)
Zak, thanks for all the tips and patience!
Greetings,
Piotrek
--
Company: mediaSELF Sp. z o.o., http://www.mediaself.pl
eZ references: http://ez.no/partners/worldwide_partners/mediaself
eZ certified developer: http://ez.no/certification/verify/272585
eZ blog: http://ez.ryba.eu
|
|
Piotrek Karaś
|
Saturday 08 December 2007 3:44:44 am
A new legal question on the horizon...
How exactly do I license an eZ Publish extension that makes use of eZ Components? I've just created one and published it under GPL:
http://ez.no/developer/contribs/applications/ez_human_captcha
Is that OK? Any tips? PS. I'm posting this question to the components mailing list as well
--
Company: mediaSELF Sp. z o.o., http://www.mediaself.pl
eZ references: http://ez.no/partners/worldwide_partners/mediaself
eZ certified developer: http://ez.no/certification/verify/272585
eZ blog: http://ez.ryba.eu
|
|
Zak Greant
|
Saturday 08 December 2007 11:49:40 am
Hi Piotrek, This is fine - just make sure to keep the license headers on the eZ Components files.
Cheers!
--zak
|
