GPL'ing CP article code
-
So, I got this email a little bit ago: Hi Marc, Just curious as to what your current arrangements are regarding the source code you've provided together with some of your articles on CodeProject, and how they've been licensed. I'm currently using parts of your TcpLib code in my application, which I was planning to license under the GPL. Now, of course, I'm not going to license your code under the same license without first asking how you plan to license your own code - I don't particurly mind what you choose, provided it's compatible with the GPL; if it isn't, that would be thoroughly disappointing for me. What's your opinion? If he modifies the code, can/should he GPL it? What does "modify" mean? Replacing a tab with 5 spaces? And what does "compatible with GPL mean"? There isn't much that's compatible with GPL, IMO, except maybe LGPL. Since the TcpLib stuff is a "lib", maybe I should tell him to use LGPL for that part? Marc
As long as it's free to use, does the nomenclature matter?
SG
-
So, I got this email a little bit ago: Hi Marc, Just curious as to what your current arrangements are regarding the source code you've provided together with some of your articles on CodeProject, and how they've been licensed. I'm currently using parts of your TcpLib code in my application, which I was planning to license under the GPL. Now, of course, I'm not going to license your code under the same license without first asking how you plan to license your own code - I don't particurly mind what you choose, provided it's compatible with the GPL; if it isn't, that would be thoroughly disappointing for me. What's your opinion? If he modifies the code, can/should he GPL it? What does "modify" mean? Replacing a tab with 5 spaces? And what does "compatible with GPL mean"? There isn't much that's compatible with GPL, IMO, except maybe LGPL. Since the TcpLib stuff is a "lib", maybe I should tell him to use LGPL for that part? Marc
As I read GPL, you are giving up the rights to your code; as the author, you should be able to control its usage. If someone wants to relase a project under GPL, before using another's code, they should ensure that the author agrees with GPL licensing. Otherwise, as stated, it may be "thoroughly disappointing". This situation reminds me of a housing development under way not too far from me; the developer cleared the land, installed decoractive fencing, painted it, started building signage for the subdivision, then approached the county about permits. He stated, "Oh, I didn't know I needed these permits..." Do the homework BEFORE starting the project. Tim
-
So, I got this email a little bit ago: Hi Marc, Just curious as to what your current arrangements are regarding the source code you've provided together with some of your articles on CodeProject, and how they've been licensed. I'm currently using parts of your TcpLib code in my application, which I was planning to license under the GPL. Now, of course, I'm not going to license your code under the same license without first asking how you plan to license your own code - I don't particurly mind what you choose, provided it's compatible with the GPL; if it isn't, that would be thoroughly disappointing for me. What's your opinion? If he modifies the code, can/should he GPL it? What does "modify" mean? Replacing a tab with 5 spaces? And what does "compatible with GPL mean"? There isn't much that's compatible with GPL, IMO, except maybe LGPL. Since the TcpLib stuff is a "lib", maybe I should tell him to use LGPL for that part? Marc
Personally I'd whack a Public Domain license (which is a bit of an oxymoron but hey this is legal-land :P) on it. That will allow him and anyone else rights to do whatever they want. If he includes your code, it will still be under Public Domain. If a program combines public-domain code with GPL-covered code, can I take the public-domain part and use it as public domain code?[^]
-
So, I got this email a little bit ago: Hi Marc, Just curious as to what your current arrangements are regarding the source code you've provided together with some of your articles on CodeProject, and how they've been licensed. I'm currently using parts of your TcpLib code in my application, which I was planning to license under the GPL. Now, of course, I'm not going to license your code under the same license without first asking how you plan to license your own code - I don't particurly mind what you choose, provided it's compatible with the GPL; if it isn't, that would be thoroughly disappointing for me. What's your opinion? If he modifies the code, can/should he GPL it? What does "modify" mean? Replacing a tab with 5 spaces? And what does "compatible with GPL mean"? There isn't much that's compatible with GPL, IMO, except maybe LGPL. Since the TcpLib stuff is a "lib", maybe I should tell him to use LGPL for that part? Marc
-
First, ask him if he'll pay you money for using the code commercially. :) Who knows, you might get lucky.
-
So, I got this email a little bit ago: Hi Marc, Just curious as to what your current arrangements are regarding the source code you've provided together with some of your articles on CodeProject, and how they've been licensed. I'm currently using parts of your TcpLib code in my application, which I was planning to license under the GPL. Now, of course, I'm not going to license your code under the same license without first asking how you plan to license your own code - I don't particurly mind what you choose, provided it's compatible with the GPL; if it isn't, that would be thoroughly disappointing for me. What's your opinion? If he modifies the code, can/should he GPL it? What does "modify" mean? Replacing a tab with 5 spaces? And what does "compatible with GPL mean"? There isn't much that's compatible with GPL, IMO, except maybe LGPL. Since the TcpLib stuff is a "lib", maybe I should tell him to use LGPL for that part? Marc
No, I don't think he can or should GPL your library as you didn't. The code is without doubt in the public domain as it's been posted on CP. If you didn't attach any licensing conditions then he can construe any usage to be 'fair usage'. I think the only enforcable right you have left is the right to be recognised as the author, anything else you would have to put before a court unless he's in agreement. If it was me I'd get him to attach a simple 'This code was placed in the public domain by the author, Marc Clifton, who hereby waives all other rights to it other than the absolute and exclusive right to be recognised as the author' type of statement and leave it at that. That way even if he modifies it he just becomes a contributor to/editor of your work and gains no rights over it, but it doesn't stop him altering or using it. Somewhere down the line it may have been modified to such an extent that your one claim is no longer reasonable or enforceable but then it's only fair if it's removed if that much work has been done by others on the lib that it is unrecognisable. Just my opinion of course which carries no legal weight :-D
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
-
So, I got this email a little bit ago: Hi Marc, Just curious as to what your current arrangements are regarding the source code you've provided together with some of your articles on CodeProject, and how they've been licensed. I'm currently using parts of your TcpLib code in my application, which I was planning to license under the GPL. Now, of course, I'm not going to license your code under the same license without first asking how you plan to license your own code - I don't particurly mind what you choose, provided it's compatible with the GPL; if it isn't, that would be thoroughly disappointing for me. What's your opinion? If he modifies the code, can/should he GPL it? What does "modify" mean? Replacing a tab with 5 spaces? And what does "compatible with GPL mean"? There isn't much that's compatible with GPL, IMO, except maybe LGPL. Since the TcpLib stuff is a "lib", maybe I should tell him to use LGPL for that part? Marc
No, all he does is compile your code as a dll and put your original license in the 'credits'. For modifying it, the code should stay under the same license.
**
xacc.ide-0.2.0.74 - now with C# 3.5 support!
**
-
First, ask him if he'll pay you money for using the code commercially. :) Who knows, you might get lucky.
Here in Codeproject Everything is Free.
Regards, Satips.:rose:
-
So, I got this email a little bit ago: Hi Marc, Just curious as to what your current arrangements are regarding the source code you've provided together with some of your articles on CodeProject, and how they've been licensed. I'm currently using parts of your TcpLib code in my application, which I was planning to license under the GPL. Now, of course, I'm not going to license your code under the same license without first asking how you plan to license your own code - I don't particurly mind what you choose, provided it's compatible with the GPL; if it isn't, that would be thoroughly disappointing for me. What's your opinion? If he modifies the code, can/should he GPL it? What does "modify" mean? Replacing a tab with 5 spaces? And what does "compatible with GPL mean"? There isn't much that's compatible with GPL, IMO, except maybe LGPL. Since the TcpLib stuff is a "lib", maybe I should tell him to use LGPL for that part? Marc
IANRS, but as I understand the GPL, your code would have to be "GPL compatible" to be incorporated into a GPLed product. The problem is: for linking your code as a lib into his application, you would have to publish the library under the LGPL, and nothing else. LGPL seems to be an acceptable licence, but still a PITA infected by religion, and has terms that are incompatible with most commercial use. So you make one happy, and alienate others. If your licence is 'weaker' (i.e. not prohibiting source distribution etc.), I *think* he can use it. Your choice. Don't starve a lawyer, ask him. GPL compatibility of various licenses[^]
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
So, I got this email a little bit ago: Hi Marc, Just curious as to what your current arrangements are regarding the source code you've provided together with some of your articles on CodeProject, and how they've been licensed. I'm currently using parts of your TcpLib code in my application, which I was planning to license under the GPL. Now, of course, I'm not going to license your code under the same license without first asking how you plan to license your own code - I don't particurly mind what you choose, provided it's compatible with the GPL; if it isn't, that would be thoroughly disappointing for me. What's your opinion? If he modifies the code, can/should he GPL it? What does "modify" mean? Replacing a tab with 5 spaces? And what does "compatible with GPL mean"? There isn't much that's compatible with GPL, IMO, except maybe LGPL. Since the TcpLib stuff is a "lib", maybe I should tell him to use LGPL for that part? Marc
My understanding is that whatever he chooses to do with your code re changing or licensing, it won't affect any licensing you choose to put in place on your own code. It's a bit of a bad faith exercise for him to license a copy of your code in a more restrictive manner than you have, but anyone who wants to use the code could just come and get your copy from here and use it. I'd say personally, let him do what he wants with the code, as long as he attributes you as the original author, and references the location of the code on CP for anyone who wants to get access to the original source. In my view the above would be a sensible blanket license for all code posted on CP.
-
Here in Codeproject Everything is Free.
Regards, Satips.:rose:
So, whoever posts a project on CP has to agree that the project is going to be "free"? If so, shouldn't this agreement be bound to some kind of license specification? Because "free" doesn't quite sound very complete to me. There area a lot of lawyers out there who could prove that "free" is actually "not free". Don't ask me how they do it, but I've seen it done.
-
My understanding is that whatever he chooses to do with your code re changing or licensing, it won't affect any licensing you choose to put in place on your own code. It's a bit of a bad faith exercise for him to license a copy of your code in a more restrictive manner than you have, but anyone who wants to use the code could just come and get your copy from here and use it. I'd say personally, let him do what he wants with the code, as long as he attributes you as the original author, and references the location of the code on CP for anyone who wants to get access to the original source. In my view the above would be a sensible blanket license for all code posted on CP.
Well, he basically asked Marc to change the licence to his liking.. :~
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
So, whoever posts a project on CP has to agree that the project is going to be "free"? If so, shouldn't this agreement be bound to some kind of license specification? Because "free" doesn't quite sound very complete to me. There area a lot of lawyers out there who could prove that "free" is actually "not free". Don't ask me how they do it, but I've seen it done.
In most countries copyright will automatically applied to what you right and you are the owner. In that case anyone needs specific permission to use your work. If you put a specific license on your work then that will normally cover who is allowed to use your work and in what situations. Personally I like the Public Domain license as it means anyone can use your work however they want, as long as they don't try to put thier own license on it.
-
Well, he basically asked Marc to change the licence to his liking.. :~
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighistHmm - I'm not sure he did. Reading the comment, I think he's saying "I want to license the code under the GPL, but if you one day change your license to one that is not GPL compatible, I'm in trouble". I don't think he's asking Marc to change the license, I think he's asking Marc to commit to not changing the license to one that would cause his downstream code to violate the GPL. If that makes any sense at all.
-
Here in Codeproject Everything is Free.
Regards, Satips.:rose:
That's the spirit, not the law. CodeProject allows each author to tack on his own license. So you will find various licenses, even very restrictive ones. When you want to use code from one of the articles, it is your job to verify you are allowed to for your particular use.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
Hmm - I'm not sure he did. Reading the comment, I think he's saying "I want to license the code under the GPL, but if you one day change your license to one that is not GPL compatible, I'm in trouble". I don't think he's asking Marc to change the license, I think he's asking Marc to commit to not changing the license to one that would cause his downstream code to violate the GPL. If that makes any sense at all.
Craster wrote:
If that makes any sense at all.
That line would make great sig! :-D
"Throughout human history, we have been dependent on machines to survive. Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony. " - Morpheus "Real men use mspaint for writing code and notepad for designing graphics." - Anna-Jayne Metcalfe
-
As I read GPL, you are giving up the rights to your code; as the author, you should be able to control its usage. If someone wants to relase a project under GPL, before using another's code, they should ensure that the author agrees with GPL licensing. Otherwise, as stated, it may be "thoroughly disappointing". This situation reminds me of a housing development under way not too far from me; the developer cleared the land, installed decoractive fencing, painted it, started building signage for the subdivision, then approached the county about permits. He stated, "Oh, I didn't know I needed these permits..." Do the homework BEFORE starting the project. Tim
Tim Carmichael wrote:
"Oh, I didn't know I needed these permits..."
Or he could have been asking after-the-fact intentionally.
"A good athlete is the result of a good and worthy opponent." - David Crow
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
So, I got this email a little bit ago: Hi Marc, Just curious as to what your current arrangements are regarding the source code you've provided together with some of your articles on CodeProject, and how they've been licensed. I'm currently using parts of your TcpLib code in my application, which I was planning to license under the GPL. Now, of course, I'm not going to license your code under the same license without first asking how you plan to license your own code - I don't particurly mind what you choose, provided it's compatible with the GPL; if it isn't, that would be thoroughly disappointing for me. What's your opinion? If he modifies the code, can/should he GPL it? What does "modify" mean? Replacing a tab with 5 spaces? And what does "compatible with GPL mean"? There isn't much that's compatible with GPL, IMO, except maybe LGPL. Since the TcpLib stuff is a "lib", maybe I should tell him to use LGPL for that part? Marc
-
Tim Carmichael wrote:
"Oh, I didn't know I needed these permits..."
Or he could have been asking after-the-fact intentionally.
"A good athlete is the result of a good and worthy opponent." - David Crow
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
In most countries copyright will automatically applied to what you right and you are the owner. In that case anyone needs specific permission to use your work. If you put a specific license on your work then that will normally cover who is allowed to use your work and in what situations. Personally I like the Public Domain license as it means anyone can use your work however they want, as long as they don't try to put thier own license on it.