As a fresh software engineer, I had always wished if we could do away with software licensing altogether. It was one way for me, as a software programmer, to avoid knowing and understanding the legal binding. The programming language is a lot better than the legal one any given day! [Continue]
Wikipedia is taking votes to decide on relicensing its content. In fact this applies to all Wikimedia Foundation sites, which have been currently licensed under GFDL, which was primarily intended for software documentation. If approved the content will be dual-licensed under CC-BY-SA along with GFDL. [Continue]
Bruce Perens talks about simplifying the mesh of open source licenses created. The open source licenses are driven more to protect the open source world from the proprietary world by applying various levels of strictness. I wonder if we will be control the number of licenses, as every developer might have his/her own idea of strictness. [Continue]
If you have been looking for a guide to check compliance with GPL, it has arrived. Legal language sure is tedious to read through and understand, so this guide can be really helpful. However I felt its own language is not any better! [Continue]
Copyrights and licenses are not the most interesting subjects in software development. Unfortunately they cannot be bypassed, they have to be confronted. The free and open source software movement has always had a legal side which is working on this. [Continue]
Trolltech has adopted GPLv3 for cross-platform open source application development toolkit Qt. It is important to note that this is an addition to its availability under GPLv2, meaning it will be available under both licenses. This indicates that even KDE might go GPLv3 in its further releases. [Continue]
The Free Software Foundation has released the GNU Affero General Public License version 3 (AGPLv3). Now if you build a web service using a AGPLv3 licensed software then you have to make your source code available, including your contribution to the code. Earlier, this restriction applied only to the ones who distributed the software. [Continue]
Two of Microsoft’s licenses, Microsoft Public License and Microsoft Reciprocal License, were approved by the OSI. As Matt Assay says, this is the right way for Microsoft to enter the open source world. Microsoft has not been in the good books of the open source community, with the patent FUD and especially in the OOXML case. [Continue]
GPL v3 and LGPL v3 have been approved by the OSI board. GPL has been one of the most popular open source licenses, though it has been equally prone to debates and controversies. GPL v3 was opened to an unwelcome debate, including many strong foot holders in open source. [Continue]
General Public License (GPL) version 3 is published by FSF after 18 months of work and equal amount of discussions and debates. The makers say it is not very different from the earlier version, which gained a lot of popularity. GPLv3 is an adaptation to new requirements and new events that happened in the open source space. [Continue]