search

laito / cleartk

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/cleartk
0 stars 0 forks source link

release ClearTK under ASL 2.0 #195

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I am interested in releasing ClearTK under ASL 2.0 and had the following 
discussion with the tech-transfer office.  This issue serves as a way of 
documenting the discussion and so we can discuss this possibility.  

[Philip]

As we get closer to a 1.0 release, I wanted to raise again the issue of the 
open-source license being used for the project.  I think I remember pretty 
clearly why we chose the BSD license over ASL and so I don't feel any need to 
re-hash that.  At one point, though, you mentioned the possibility of setting 
up a foundation of some sort that could take ownership/copyright of the code - 
and then it could release the code using ASL.  My memory is a bit foggy on what 
we discussed about this but I think this is roughly what was said.  So, my 
questions are - is this type of scenario still possible (i.e. would you allow 
it?)  And, what would be involved to make this happen?

I can live with the BSD license and I don't want to cause too much trouble.  
However, in commercial settings it seems pretty clear to me that there is a 
preference (even if slight) for ASL.  Additionally, it seems to be the license 
of choice in the UIMA world where I work. 

[TTO]

Just to re-hash a little bit, my concern with ASL is that it has a
patent grant clause that would apply to the entire University of
Colorado if CU were to release it ASL, but if a separate entity like a
foundation released it under ASL, CU would not have to grant any patent
rights along with it.  The way to do this is to set up a non-profit or
for profit company.  The company would receive ClearTK under the BSD
license since CU released it BSD and then the company would release
ClearTK under ASL, since the BSD allows the company to do that. In
addition to the hassles of setting up the entity, the only other problem
is that you would have this BSD version out there from CU in addition to
the ASL version from the company/foundation.  

[Philip]
Is there a transfer of copyright ownership?  It seems like I couldn't just slap 
an ASL license on the source code files and take out the BSD license without 
having the explicit right to remove the BSD license granted by CU.  Also, it 
seems like you would want the CU copyright to be removed from any files that 
contain an ASL license.  It's this sentence that confuses me:

 The company would receive ClearTK under the BSD
license since CU released it BSD and then the company would release
ClearTK under ASL, since the BSD allows the company to do that.

This implies that I could set up a company and release it under an ASL license 
without coordinating with you (i.e. CU) at all because the BSD permits that and 
that is all that I need.  Is that right?  It doesn't sound right - my 
understanding of BSD is that the only restriction is that you can't remove the 
BSD license statement. 

[TTO]

You should not take out the BSD verbiage.  Here's an article on how you
can do this if you were to include BSD software in a GPL release.  Just
think of ASL 2.0 as GPL.

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.
html

So, you include the BSD language in the files, but you add ASL 2.0 on
top of it so that whoever is getting the whole package from the company
is actually subject to the ASL 2.0 (although they would also have to
retain the BSD language as well). The BSD allows this, and no
coordination with CU is necessary.

Rather than giving up the copyright to the company, another way we could
do it is that CU could grant permission to your company to release it
under ASL 2.0 without the BSD, but I'm not inclined to do that because
the BSD copyright statement at least provides a little bit of
advertising for CU and also includes the no warranty language which
provides additional protection.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by pvogren@gmail.com on 7 Jan 2011 at 5:28

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by pvogren@gmail.com on 14 Jan 2011 at 10:35

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by steven.b...@gmail.com on 24 Jul 2012 at 6:02

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by steven.b...@gmail.com on 3 May 2013 at 8:44

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by phi...@ogren.info on 15 Mar 2014 at 5:41