Github ToS and Open Source

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
27 messages Options
12
Xen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Github ToS and Open Source

Xen
Tom H schreef op 03-03-2017 20:46:

> I suspect that he's misinterpreting [1].

I think you are right. The word "solely" means that the github user ONLY
acquires a right to reproduce on Github (but not anywhere else, as per
the Github license).

So even though another license might allow reproduction elsewhere, the
Github license only grants it (enforces it) for the specific Github
platform you are on (Github).

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Xen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Github ToS and Open Source

Xen
In reply to this post by Tom H-4
Tom H schreef op 03-03-2017 20:55:
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Ralf Mardorf <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/2013-September/034140.html
>
> So the guy's whining about an open source project being forked.
> Really?!

Not just that (I read the entire thread, thank you Ralph),

He was complaining about a project that hadn't seen any work, was
(perhaps 'accidentally') published to Github, but the author (uploader)
had changed the name (slightly) and put a copyright notice of himself on
some files.

There was nothing else to it.

So this "fork" was not under active use by anyone, it was just a
development project, a working copy.

The author (Fons) of the program decided that uploading to Github was
the greatest offense as opposed to keeping it private.

A bit ridiculous if you ask me, but yeah. I understand the sentiment of
the author, but not the rigorousness with which he pursued it.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Github ToS and Open Source

Ralf Mardorf-2
On Fri, 03 Mar 2017 21:37:42 +0100, Xen wrote:
>Tom H schreef op 03-03-2017 20:55:
>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:  
>>>
>>> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/2013-September/034140.html 
>>
>> So the guy's whining about an open source project being forked.
>> Really?!  
>
>Not just that

That's just one example what happens in our communities. Very seldom a
license gets malevolently offended, most of the times they are
accidently offended and those who do it are usually willing to fix their
mistakes. Sometimes there is trouble for absolutely nothing.

At other times the license itself does cause the issue. Some Linux
music software coders have written, that they don't allow that their
software is used for religious or racist things, but i don't remember
which project it is.
Something that affects Ubuntu is the linuxsampler issue.

I already posted the link to the frontend package, without an available
package for the backend: http://packages.ubuntu.com/yakkety/qsampler

This is the reason:

https://www.linuxsampler.org/faq.html#commercial_products

It's available by the official Arch Linux repositories and once it was
also available by Debian/Ubuntu repositories, too. Arch Linux calls the
license/s "GPL custom:exception", but a GPL with an exception actually
isn't a GPL anymore.


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Xen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Github ToS and Open Source

Xen
Ralf Mardorf schreef op 03-03-2017 22:23:

> That's just one example what happens in our communities. Very seldom a
> license gets malevolently offended, most of the times they are
> accidently offended and those who do it are usually willing to fix
> their
> mistakes. Sometimes there is trouble for absolutely nothing.
>
> At other times the license itself does cause the issue. Some Linux
> music software coders have written, that they don't allow that their
> software is used for religious or racist things, but i don't remember
> which project it is.

Like the "do no evil" thing of the aforementioned JSON (?) developer.

> I already posted the link to the frontend package, without an available
> package for the backend: http://packages.ubuntu.com/yakkety/qsampler



> It's available by the official Arch Linux repositories and once it was
> also available by Debian/Ubuntu repositories, too. Arch Linux calls the
> license/s "GPL custom:exception", but a GPL with an exception actually
> isn't a GPL anymore.

Wouldn't it normally just be available in "non-free"?

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Github ToS and Open Source

Ralf Mardorf-2
On Fri, 03 Mar 2017 22:40:12 +0100, Xen wrote:
>> It's available by the official Arch Linux repositories and once it
>> was also available by Debian/Ubuntu repositories, too. Arch Linux
>> calls the license/s "GPL custom:exception", but a GPL with an
>> exception actually isn't a GPL anymore.  
>
>Wouldn't it normally just be available in "non-free"?

I don't know, but free as in libre and free as in beer music software
and sounds that are usable, IOW that fit the state of affairs
regarding quality standards, aren't that easy to get. Actually there
aren't official standards, but musicians are used to get much wanted
sounds of professional sound quality and wanted synth features for less
than 10,- EUR by proprietary software for mobile devices.

Everybody who disagrees with my claim might be willing to contribute to
this request:

http://lists.ardour.org/pipermail/ardour-users-ardour.org/2017-March/028317.html

I will not waste my time with this dead issue, I prefer to pay 10,-
EUR now and then.





--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Xen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Github ToS and Open Source

Xen
Ralf Mardorf schreef op 04-03-2017 5:37:

> On Fri, 03 Mar 2017 22:40:12 +0100, Xen wrote:
>>> It's available by the official Arch Linux repositories and once it
>>> was also available by Debian/Ubuntu repositories, too. Arch Linux
>>> calls the license/s "GPL custom:exception", but a GPL with an
>>> exception actually isn't a GPL anymore.
>>
>> Wouldn't it normally just be available in "non-free"?
>
> I don't know, but free as in libre and free as in beer music software
> and sounds that are usable, IOW that fit the state of affairs
> regarding quality standards, aren't that easy to get. Actually there
> aren't official standards, but musicians are used to get much wanted
> sounds of professional sound quality and wanted synth features for less
> than 10,- EUR by proprietary software for mobile devices.

I really meant that if the only issue is a GPL violation because an
author forbids commercial use, it would seem that the package would
simply become "non-free" and can still be available.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Github ToS and Open Source

Ralf Mardorf-2
On Sat, 04 Mar 2017 10:42:14 +0100, Xen wrote:
>I really meant that if the only issue is a GPL violation because an
>author forbids commercial use, it would seem that the package would
>simply become "non-free" and can still be available.

But seemingly a GPL exception forbidding to sell the software is a
violation of the GPL, maybe it makes the license null and void and
perhaps the Debian/Ubuntu policies don't allow to provide software
without a license or a "broken" license.

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/linuxsampler

"Does the GPL allow me to sell copies of the program for money?
(#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney )

    Yes, the GPL allows everyone to do this. The right to sell copies
    is part of the definition of free software. Except in one special
    situation, there is no limit on what price you can charge. (The one
    exception is the required written offer to provide source code that
    must accompany binary-only release.)"

IIRC when I made an icon for Ubuntustudio some license was required.
I allowed the packager to use what ever license is required ;). I
suspect that Linuxsampler has got no valid license, hence in theory it
could cause legal issues.

See also

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#WhatIsCompatible
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#WhatDoesCompatMean

"Still other projects offered terms that were inconsistent; for
example, a program that claimed to be licensed under the GPL but "for
non-commercial use only," which contradicts the GPL's terms." -
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/18/github_licensing_study/

However, seemingly github endeavours that all software hosted becomes
GPL compatible.


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
12