Licences, licences, licences
I never tire of this subject.
Has anyone heard of the MSPL? I think it's my new favorite licence.
In an act of indescribable brilliance, Microsoft took a permissive licence and added a condition that forbids the addition of conditions that forbid the addition of conditions. You got that? You can use and relicense the code all you want, adding conditions to your heart's content, but you can't add a condition that forbids other people from adding more conditions. It's sort of like a reverse GPL. While the GPL allows less conditions, this one allows more.
It's brilliant!
Has anyone heard of the MSPL? I think it's my new favorite licence.
In an act of indescribable brilliance, Microsoft took a permissive licence and added a condition that forbids the addition of conditions that forbid the addition of conditions. You got that? You can use and relicense the code all you want, adding conditions to your heart's content, but you can't add a condition that forbids other people from adding more conditions. It's sort of like a reverse GPL. While the GPL allows less conditions, this one allows more.
It's brilliant!
closed account (z05DSL3A)
Do you mean this one?
Remarkably brief for a Microsoft License.
If so I'm not sure I'm reading it the same way.
| Microsoft wrote: |
|---|
|
Microsoft Public License (Ms-PL) This license governs use of the accompanying software. If you use the software, you accept this license. If you do not accept the license, do not use the software. 1. Definitions The terms "reproduce," "reproduction," "derivative works," and "distribution" have the same meaning here as under U.S. copyright law. A "contribution" is the original software, or any additions or changes to the software. A "contributor" is any person that distributes its contribution under this license. "Licensed patents" are a contributor's patent claims that read directly on its contribution. 2. Grant of Rights (A) Copyright Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright license to reproduce its contribution, prepare derivative works of its contribution, and distribute its contribution or any derivative works that you create. (B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licensed patents to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and/or otherwise dispose of its contribution in the software or derivative works of the contribution in the software. 3. Conditions and Limitations (A) No Trademark License- This license does not grant you rights to use any contributors' name, logo, or trademarks. (B) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically. (C) If you distribute any portion of the software, you must retain all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices that are present in the software. (D) If you distribute any portion of the software in source code form, you may do so only under this license by including a complete copy of this license with your distribution. If you distribute any portion of the software in compiled or object code form, you may only do so under a license that complies with this license. (E) The software is licensed "as-is." You bear the risk of using it. The contributors give no express warranties, guarantees or conditions. You may have additional consumer rights under your local laws which this license cannot change. To the extent permitted under your local laws, the contributors exclude the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement. |
If so I'm not sure I'm reading it the same way.
Yeah, that one.
I know what you're thinking. "Where's the part about the conditions?" I don't know, either, but the FSF deemed it incompatible with the GPL on those grounds, so...
I know what you're thinking. "Where's the part about the conditions?" I don't know, either, but the FSF deemed it incompatible with the GPL on those grounds, so...
closed account (z05DSL3A)
I did read a good 'English'* explanation of this license somewhere, I'll have to find it again.
* non-legalese
* non-legalese
| Microsoft took a permissive licence and added a condition that forbids the addition of conditions that forbid the addition of conditions. |
Somehow I do not see that from the text of the license that you posted. Can anyone clarify?
I'm not sure I understand. Are you being sarcastic? It's hard to tell on the internet when, you know, I can't see your facial expression or hear the tone of your voice...
I'm absolutely sincere. Just look for my last interchange about licences with tition, where I sum up my philosophy. Never mind. Not even I remember exactly where or when that was.
Basically, I follow the BSD school of open source licensing, and hate the GPL.
Basically, I follow the BSD school of open source licensing, and hate the GPL.
Last edited on
I knew you used the BSD licence; because I saw it included with your programs. I also guessed you hated the GPL because I know you hate Richard Stallman (personally I find him funny, if a little... weird).
Personally I like the BSD license because it is very permissive. The one thing I don't like about it is that it doesn't say anything about crediting the original authors.
For now, however, all of my own code is public domain. It's simply not 'good' enough (that is; I haven't written anything to date that anyone other than myself would find interesting) to release under any license.
What about the Mozilla Public License? And the X11 license?
Personally I like the BSD license because it is very permissive. The one thing I don't like about it is that it doesn't say anything about crediting the original authors.
For now, however, all of my own code is public domain. It's simply not 'good' enough (that is; I haven't written anything to date that anyone other than myself would find interesting) to release under any license.
What about the Mozilla Public License? And the X11 license?
To make it short, I like all permissive and freer licences, including the "free for educational and non-commercial purposes" one (I don't know what it's called). I'm also OK with permissive licences with special restrictions such as "cannot be used for military purposes" and the like. If the army wants to blow stuff up, the least they could do is not force programmers into moral dilemmas.
The BSD licence does require that unmodified versions keep the copy of the licence and make it visible. As for derivatives, it varies. It's possible to write a BSD-like that the names of neither the author nor the software may be used without permission in modified versions.
Still, a small "contains code written by" is just common courtesy. BSD programmers don't mind their code being used, but they're not too happy about plagiarism. That applies even to public domain. You wouldn't claim to have composed Beethoven's 9th Symphony, would you? That would just be silly.
The BSD licence does require that unmodified versions keep the copy of the licence and make it visible. As for derivatives, it varies. It's possible to write a BSD-like that the names of neither the author nor the software may be used without permission in modified versions.
Still, a small "contains code written by" is just common courtesy. BSD programmers don't mind their code being used, but they're not too happy about plagiarism. That applies even to public domain. You wouldn't claim to have composed Beethoven's 9th Symphony, would you? That would just be silly.
| RMS also has a phobia of spider plants. When RMS starts bothering a grad student and going to his office and talking to him constantly and getting him to spend all his time writing free software, the grad student will complain to someone on the floor and they'll let them in on the secret: get a spider plant in your office. The next time RMS drops by, his eyes will bulge a little, and he'll say "Umm. . . I wanted to talk to you about hacking some elisp code . . . why don't you stop by my office sometime?" and make a hasty exit. |
Last edited on
Fair enough. I too dislike plagiarism; but again, don't mind people using things I came up with.
Where did you get all that about RMS? The things about him I find funny can be summed up in this (somewhat irritating) video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sJUDx7iEJw
Edit: he has such a lovely voice (ew).
Maybe this will cheer you up: http://edward.oconnor.cx/2005/04/rms
I lol'd...
Where did you get all that about RMS? The things about him I find funny can be summed up in this (somewhat irritating) video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sJUDx7iEJw
Edit: he has such a lovely voice (ew).
Maybe this will cheer you up: http://edward.oconnor.cx/2005/04/rms
I lol'd...
Last edited on
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.