[MonoDevelop] Licensing concerns.
Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:53:48 -0600
Well Bernhard the main issue here is about Intellectual Property.
A license and even the GPL cannot change the fact of IP.
Some facts: SharpDevelop contributors has IP on their code, and =
contributors have IP on their new code (not including just change
SharpDevelop files of course).
That is the bottom line and no license can change that fact. By
contributing to a GPL project any contributor agrees to but their IP =
into the GPL project so that that project can use it and benefit from =
external contribution. But that does not change the ownership of IP, =
just a gift to be used free of charge back to the GPL project.
The IP is still with the contributor, since he wrote the code, and he =
whatever else he want to do this his property, he just agreed to also =
it (and I don't think anyone is disagreeing on that one).
Nobody was implying that MD can change their license without the =
author's permission. MD is still a GPL project as well and will be one
unless the original author would allow differently, which is not the =
The point is simple, if I anything to a GPL project I give you the code =
well to be used in the context of the GPL (and you cannot =
my code as I cannot resell/re-license yours). But it's still my
contribution and if I choose to use my contribution in a context that =
not include your product I can do so, and it's none of your business. =
choose whatever license I want in that context, and do not even have to =
you that I did, since I'm the owner of what I wrote.
However I would not be surprised at all if the FSF has a different =
view, since their political background would imply that. But that =
have to be proven in a court of law first, and the changes would be =
that that point of view would prevail. But that is just my personal =
and one of the main reasons why many companies stay as far away from =
If you really believe that you own the right to forbid a contributor to =
GPL project to retain IP ownership you are stranger than I thought. =
really the bottom line of the entire argument in my opinion. What I'm
reading is Todd is asking to retain IP owner of what he wrote from =
and he agrees to provide his contribution to be used in the context of =
GPL project referred to. And you try to tell him that he can't retain =
- URS C. MUFF
SOFTWARE ARCHITECT - RESEARCH LAB
UMUFF@QUARK.COM=A0=A0=A0=A0 - X6360
This e-mail transmission and any documents, files, or previous e-mail
messages appended or attached to it, may contain information that is
confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended =
or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, =
hereby notified that you must not read this transmission and that any
disclosure, copying, printing, distribution, or use of the information
contained or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If =
have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the
sender by telephone +1 (303) 894-3360 or return e-mail message
firstname.lastname@example.org and delete the original transmission, its attachments, =
any copies without reading or saving in any manner. Thank you.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com =
> firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Bernhard Spuida
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 8:15 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [MonoDevelop] Licensing concerns.
> > > We chose the GPL on purpose so no-one can integrate our code in a
> > > non-GPL application without our explicit permission. And as =
> > > already touched upon this issue, we (#develop) intend to sell
> > > differently licensed components. We can do so, because we have
> > > copyright assignments of all our contributors (OOo and StarOffice
> > > being a prime example of this approach).
> > That is obvious, when it comes to YOUR code, and YOUR distribution =
> > #develop, but absolutely non-obvious for so called derivative work.
> > Are you implying that you want to sell MonoDevelop as well to YOUR
> > profit, that would be outrageous!
> We do not intend to resell MonoDevelop - MonoDevelop is the result of
> the MonoDevelop team's work. We respect others' creative efforts and
> appreciate work based on our work.
> > > How do you think would MySQL AB react if you asked them to =
> > > some of their older releases to MIT?
> > Nobody is asking YOU to relicense ANYTHING, they are just =
> > THEIR OWN GOODS, is that so difficult to understand? YOU did not =
> > the code that John and Todd wrote, so it does not belong to
> > YOU/#develop, it's as simple as that. They may have to provide =
> > code in a GPL'ed version but that does not make it YOUR code!
> We are *not* trying to appropriate the code written by Todd, John and
> all the other great developers working on monodevelop. However as
> their work is based on ours we strongly feel that we have some right
> to say what will happen to our code.
> As we stated previously, we have asked the FSF for final and
> authoritative clarification of all the issues involving the GPL and
> other licenses in this matter.
> If you want to see the wording of the inquiry, please refer to this:
> In my opinion, throwing arguments at each other does not do any of
> the parties involved any good. The only way to reach mutual agreement
> is to be constructive in handling this situation. Therefore let us
> all wait for the answer of the FSF.
> Bernhard Spuida
> #develop senior word wrangler
> "This manual says what our product actually does, no matter what the
> may have told you it does." -In a californian graphic board manual,
> Monodevelop-list mailing list