search

joe-the-ark / ark

Arks is a free, online group journey for 3 to 15 people to connect psychological and inner safety through the perspective of safe circles. Key questions for working in psychologically safe circles include: Who is still solo? Who is in multiple safe circles and acts as an integrator? How securely connected is the leader? Developed by Dr. Joe Maier
https://info.arks.ch/
GNU General Public License v3.0
5 stars 0 forks source link

Decide on the License of this game #1

Closed zdavatz closed 3 years ago

zdavatz commented 4 years ago

@joe-the-ark needs to decide on the License of this software. I suggest to use GPLv3.0

joe-the-ark commented 4 years ago

Thanks for guiding me through the license junggle & propose GPLv3.0 – I'll take that decision, once the product is available & the competitive landscape better readable.

LehaoLin commented 4 years ago

Hope the table image below can help you make the decision. Lehao. image

zdavatz commented 4 years ago

GPLv3.0

joe-the-ark commented 3 years ago

How to go about protecting Arks IP (intelectual property)? 1) Partner up with a small law firm as soon as the product is ready & try to label & protect my IP via a patent - or my other option is 2) go open source for folks who are open source themselves (GPLv3.0), create momentum & team up with a law firm for a split who goes after violators who are using Ark in a non-open-source environment. @zdavatz - I assume you are operating in scenario 2? Who is your laywer?

zdavatz commented 3 years ago

You only need a lawyer if you want to sue somebody.

joe-the-ark commented 3 years ago

That I understand @zdavatz. And I have never sued anybody, so far. Thinking through an open-source model, that might be one of the contingencies - never occured to you?

zdavatz commented 3 years ago

It it always good to know a lawyer that likes OpenSource Software.

joe-the-ark commented 3 years ago

Whom would you recommend?

zdavatz commented 3 years ago

What do you want to discuss with him? What issues?

joe-the-ark commented 3 years ago

I am still struggling to understand the implications of gpl v3 --- currently, I am reading up & collect my reference-texts here...:: https://www.ixistenz.ch/index.php?diff=3734

@zdavatz :: I compiled this set of questions - it would be very helpful for my understanding of GPLv3, if you could answer the first few. The follow up to question 5 is most likely a lawyer-question?

  1. If @zdavatz would develop an improved and adapted version of the ARK, under a GPLv3-license, would he have to share back his improvements to me? My understanding after reading up on the license: No, @zdavatz would not have to share his code with me (the ARK repo), only to his clients or to the folks to whom you make your code available. Because GPLv3 is a distribution licence – am I missing out on something?
  2. What are examples of including ARK in proprietary applications? E.g. Swisscom develops 'their' version of the ARK - if they do this for their own use, do they have to share their code back or / and pay for license exceptions if Swisscom rather prefers not to share back?
  3. What are examples of selling license exceptions to free software licenses (ARK under a GPLv3 license) as an example of ethically acceptable commercialization practice? E.g. Siemens building AI around ARK, would they need to pay for license exception, if they were to use the ARK AI only internally?
  4. If I release ARK under GPLv3, could anyone e.g. a Consulting Firm like McKinsey sell ARK to McKinsey clients without releasing the code they are using?
  5. If I release ARK under GPLv3, could anyone e.g. a Consulting Firm like McKinsey sell playing a McKinsey hosted version of the ARK to McKinsey clients without releasing the code they are using?
  6. If I release ARK under GPLv3, could I combine this with a fremium model by excluding adds-on from the project, e.g. the team-heatmap to ask money for it without sharing the code? How could I intelectually protect the heatmap?

Quote related to question 5: You can sell proprietary plugins. There is an isomorphism between data structures and the control structures that consume them, so very often you may see a “platform” that is GPL but there are totally-optional “plugins” or “modules” which are proprietary. This requires some up-front effort, and you may want to run it by a lawyer (I am not one) to make sure that it does not count as “linking” in the GPL sense. Source: https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/2338/can-i-use-gpl-libraries-in-a-closed-source-project-if-only-the-output-is-distrib

joe-the-ark commented 3 years ago

Thank you for your kind and valuable guidance @zdavatz 20201029_102135

zdavatz commented 3 years ago

Good questions above. I hope I could answer them in our meeting.

joe-the-ark commented 3 years ago

Absolutelly @zdavatz --- thank you for your guidance!