Category:Licensing: Difference between revisions

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
(19 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==Introduction==
 
=Introduction=


Licensing is giving permission for someone to use something.  This category of the P2P Foundation Wiki covers a number of different aspects of licensing including reviews of licenses and licensing groups that serve creators throughout the world.   
Licensing is giving permission for someone to use something.  This category of the P2P Foundation Wiki covers a number of different aspects of licensing including reviews of licenses and licensing groups that serve creators throughout the world.   
Line 8: Line 6:
* [[Introduction to Creative Commons Licenses]]
* [[Introduction to Creative Commons Licenses]]
* [http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/columns/choosing_and_using_free_licenses_software_hardware_and_aesthetic_works Choosing and Using Free Licenses for Software, Hardware, and Aesthetic works]
* [http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/columns/choosing_and_using_free_licenses_software_hardware_and_aesthetic_works Choosing and Using Free Licenses for Software, Hardware, and Aesthetic works]


Christian Siefkes on the three freedoms characteristic of [[Copyleft]] licenses:
Christian Siefkes on the three freedoms characteristic of [[Copyleft]] licenses:


    * The freedom to use the work for any purpose.
* The freedom to use the work for any purpose.
    * The freedom to study the work and to change it to make it to do what you wish.
* The freedom to study the work and to change it to make it to do what you wish.
    * The freedom to distribute and share the work with others, so that the whole community may benefit.
* The freedom to distribute and share the work with others, so that the whole community may benefit.


Combinations of the three freedoms must be possible, too. The Free Software Definition specifies a fourth freedom that combines the preceding two (distribute modified versions).
Combinations of the three freedoms must be possible, too. The Free Software Definition specifies a fourth freedom that combines the preceding two (distribute modified versions).
Line 21: Line 18:
(http://www.keimform.de/2010/self-organized-plenty/)
(http://www.keimform.de/2010/self-organized-plenty/)


'''Important article: [[Defining Open Content Licenses]]'''; Stephen Downes in defense of the non-commercial clause, at http://www.downes.ca/files/FreeLearning.pdf (pp. 122+)


=Typology=


== Status ==
=== "Our licenses aren't working anymore" ===
Bruce Perens:
"Our licenses aren't working anymore," he said. "We've had enough time that businesses have found all of the loopholes and thus we need to do something new. The GPL is not acting the way the GPL should have done when one-third of all paid-for Linux systems are sold with a GPL circumvention. That's RHEL." (RHEL stands for Red Hat Enterprise Linux, which in June, under IBM's ownership, stopped making its source code available as required under the GPL.)"
(https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/27/bruce_peren)
==Typology==


* [[Jordan Hatcher]], in an interview with Richard Poynder:
* [[Jordan Hatcher]], in an interview with Richard Poynder:
Line 29: Line 38:
" I see free and open licence development as happening within three tranches, all related to a specific area of use.
" I see free and open licence development as happening within three tranches, all related to a specific area of use.


==1. FOSS for software.==  
===1. FOSS for software.===


Alongside the GPL, there have been a number of licences developed since the birth of the movement (and continuing to today), all aimed at software. These licences work best for software and tend to fall over when applied to other areas.
Alongside the GPL, there have been a number of licences developed since the birth of the movement (and continuing to today), all aimed at software. These licences work best for software and tend to fall over when applied to other areas.


 
===2. Open licences and Public licences for content.===
==2. Open licences and Public licences for content.==  


These are aimed at content, such as video, images, music, and so on. Creative Commons is certainly the most popular, but definitely not the first. The birth of CC does however represent a watershed moment in thinking about open licensing for content.
These are aimed at content, such as video, images, music, and so on. Creative Commons is certainly the most popular, but definitely not the first. The birth of CC does however represent a watershed moment in thinking about open licensing for content.
Line 46: Line 54:
I wrote about this in a bit more detail recently on my blog.
I wrote about this in a bit more detail recently on my blog.


 
===3. Open Data Licences.===
==3. Open Data Licences.==  


Databases are different from content and software — they are a little like both in what users want to do with them and how licensors want to protect them, but are different from software and content in both the legal rights that apply and how database creators want to use open data licences.
Databases are different from content and software — they are a little like both in what users want to do with them and how licensors want to protect them, but are different from software and content in both the legal rights that apply and how database creators want to use open data licences.
Line 55: Line 62:




=Key Resources=
==Key Quotes==


"Why is it a problem that the concepts of free software and open source are intrinsically tied to licenses? It’s that the aims and goals of both of these movements are about distribution and therefore consumption, but what people care about most today is about the production of software. Software licences regulate distribution, but cannot regulate production. (technically they can, but practically, they can’t. I get into this below.) This is also the main challenge of whatever comes after open source; they cannot rely on the legal tactics of the last generation. I don’t have solutions here."


==Related Sections==
- Steve Blatnik [https://words.steveklabnik.com/what-comes-after-open-source]


* [http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Standards Open Standards]]


* [http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Peerproperty Peer Property]
==Key Resources==


* [[Software Licenses Metamap‎‎ ]]
* [[Open Source Licenses Summarized and Explained in Plain English]]


===Related Sections===


==Audio & Video==
* [http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Standards Open Standards]
* [http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Peerproperty Peer Property]
 
===Audio & Video===


#[[Brian Newman on Online Distribution and Creative Licenses]]
#[[Brian Newman on Online Distribution and Creative Licenses]]
Line 73: Line 86:
#[[Ragavan Srinivasan on Open Licenses in Education]]
#[[Ragavan Srinivasan on Open Licenses in Education]]


===Essays and Reports===


==Essays and Reports==
#[[Creative Commons is to Free Culture what Shareware is to Free Software]]. Dmytri Kleiner.
 
#Report: Fred von Lohmann, A Better Way Forward: [[Voluntary Collective Licensing of Music File Sharing]], April 2008''' [http://www.eff.org/files/eff-a-better-way-forward.pdf]
'''* Report: Fred von Lohmann, A Better Way Forward: [[Voluntary Collective Licensing of Music File Sharing]], April 2008''' [http://www.eff.org/files/eff-a-better-way-forward.pdf]
#* Article: Bonvoisin, J. et al., (2017). What is the “Source” of Open Source Hardware?. Journal of Open Hardware. 1(1), p.5.
 
[https://openhardware.metajnl.com/articles/10.5334/joh.7/]
=Licenses per Domain=


==Licenses per Domain==


==Creativity, Art & Music==
===Creativity, Art & Music===


#[[Free Art License]]
#[[Free Art License]]
#[[Free Music Public License]] ; [[Free Sheet Music License]]
#[[Free Music Public License]] ; [[Free Sheet Music License]]


 
===Education===
==Education==


#[[OER Licensing Models‎]]
#[[OER Licensing Models‎]]


 
===Equity-based Licenses===
 
==Equity-based Licenses==


#[[Common Good Public License]]
#[[Common Good Public License]]
Line 103: Line 114:
#[[IANG License]]
#[[IANG License]]


 
===Free Network Services===
==Free Network Services==


#[[Network Service Licenses]]
#[[Network Service Licenses]]


 
===[[Open Data Licenses]]===
==[[Open Data Licenses]]==


Aimed at placing work into the public domain. The public domain has a very specific meaning in a legal context: It means that there are no copyright or other IP rights over the work
Aimed at placing work into the public domain. The public domain has a very specific meaning in a legal context: It means that there are no copyright or other IP rights over the work


#[[Public Domain Dedication Licence]] (PDDL)
#[[Public Domain Dedication and License]] (PDDL)
#[[Public Doman Dedication Certificate]] (PDDC)  
#Public Doman Dedication Certificate (PDDC)  
#[[Creative Commons Zero]]  
#[[CC0|Creative Commons Zero]]  


Also:
Also:
Line 122: Line 131:
#ODC-Attribution licence
#ODC-Attribution licence


===Open Design and Manufacturing / Hardware===


==Open Design and Manufacturing / Hardware==
* [http://www.open-electronics.org/how-to-choose-your-open-source-hardware-license/ How to choose your Open Source Hardware License]


#[[Recommended Open Hardware Licenses‎]]
#[[Open Design License Agreement]]
#[[Open Design License Agreement]]
#[[Open Hardware Licenses]]
#[[Open Hardware Licenses]]
#[[TAPR Open Hardware License]]
#[[TAPR Open Hardware License]]
#[[CERN Open Hardware License]]
#[[Talis Community License]]
#[[Talis Community License]]
#[[Three-Dimensional Printing Open License]]


 
===Other===
==Other==


#[[General Public License for Plant Germplasm]]
#[[General Public License for Plant Germplasm]]


[[Category:Peerproperty]]
[[Category:Peerproperty]]
[[Category:P2P_Domains]]

Latest revision as of 16:40, 5 May 2024

Introduction

Licensing is giving permission for someone to use something. This category of the P2P Foundation Wiki covers a number of different aspects of licensing including reviews of licenses and licensing groups that serve creators throughout the world.

Christian Siefkes on the three freedoms characteristic of Copyleft licenses:

  • The freedom to use the work for any purpose.
  • The freedom to study the work and to change it to make it to do what you wish.
  • The freedom to distribute and share the work with others, so that the whole community may benefit.

Combinations of the three freedoms must be possible, too. The Free Software Definition specifies a fourth freedom that combines the preceding two (distribute modified versions).

Copyleft ensures that the three freedoms will also hold for all derived works: I may only published derivative versions if I give all their users the same rights." (http://www.keimform.de/2010/self-organized-plenty/)

Important article: Defining Open Content Licenses; Stephen Downes in defense of the non-commercial clause, at http://www.downes.ca/files/FreeLearning.pdf (pp. 122+)


Status

"Our licenses aren't working anymore"

Bruce Perens:

"Our licenses aren't working anymore," he said. "We've had enough time that businesses have found all of the loopholes and thus we need to do something new. The GPL is not acting the way the GPL should have done when one-third of all paid-for Linux systems are sold with a GPL circumvention. That's RHEL." (RHEL stands for Red Hat Enterprise Linux, which in June, under IBM's ownership, stopped making its source code available as required under the GPL.)"

(https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/27/bruce_peren)


Typology

" I see free and open licence development as happening within three tranches, all related to a specific area of use.

1. FOSS for software.

Alongside the GPL, there have been a number of licences developed since the birth of the movement (and continuing to today), all aimed at software. These licences work best for software and tend to fall over when applied to other areas.

2. Open licences and Public licences for content.

These are aimed at content, such as video, images, music, and so on. Creative Commons is certainly the most popular, but definitely not the first. The birth of CC does however represent a watershed moment in thinking about open licensing for content.

I distinguish open licences from public licences here, mostly because Creative Commons is so popular. Open has so many meanings to people (as do “free”) that it is critical to define from a legal perspective what is meant when one says “open”. The Open Knowledge Definition does this, and states that “open” means users have the right to use, reuse, and redistribute the content with very few restrictions — only attribution and share-alike are allowed restrictions, and commercial use must specifically be allowed.

The Open Definition means that only two out of the main six CC licences are open content licences — CC-BY and CC-BY-SA. The other four involve the No Derivatives (ND) restriction (thus prohibiting reuse) or have Non Commercial (NC) restrictions. The other four are what I refer to as “public licences”; in other words they are licences provided for use by the general public.

Of course CC’s public domain tools, such as CC0, all meet the Open Definition as well because they have no restrictions on use, reuse, and redistribution.

I wrote about this in a bit more detail recently on my blog.

3. Open Data Licences.

Databases are different from content and software — they are a little like both in what users want to do with them and how licensors want to protect them, but are different from software and content in both the legal rights that apply and how database creators want to use open data licences.

As a result, there’s a need for specific open data licences, which is why we founded Open Data Commons. Today we have three tools available. It’s a new area of open licensing and we’re all still trying to work out all the questions and implications." (http://poynder.blogspot.com/2010/10/interview-with-jordan-hatcher.html)


Key Quotes

"Why is it a problem that the concepts of free software and open source are intrinsically tied to licenses? It’s that the aims and goals of both of these movements are about distribution and therefore consumption, but what people care about most today is about the production of software. Software licences regulate distribution, but cannot regulate production. (technically they can, but practically, they can’t. I get into this below.) This is also the main challenge of whatever comes after open source; they cannot rely on the legal tactics of the last generation. I don’t have solutions here."

- Steve Blatnik [1]


Key Resources

Related Sections

Audio & Video

  1. Brian Newman on Online Distribution and Creative Licenses
  2. Eben Moglen on Document Licenses and GPL3 ; Eben Moglen on Open Licenses in a Web Services Era
  3. Joi Ito on Commons-based Licenses and Games
  4. Ragavan Srinivasan on Open Licenses in Education

Essays and Reports

  1. Creative Commons is to Free Culture what Shareware is to Free Software. Dmytri Kleiner.
  2. Report: Fred von Lohmann, A Better Way Forward: Voluntary Collective Licensing of Music File Sharing, April 2008 [2]
    • Article: Bonvoisin, J. et al., (2017). What is the “Source” of Open Source Hardware?. Journal of Open Hardware. 1(1), p.5.

[3]

Licenses per Domain

Creativity, Art & Music

  1. Free Art License
  2. Free Music Public License ; Free Sheet Music License

Education

  1. OER Licensing Models‎

Equity-based Licenses

  1. Common Good Public License
  2. Copyfarleft
  3. Ecopyleft
  4. Equitable Access Licensing
  5. Equitable Open Source
  6. Equity-based Licenses
  7. IANG License

Free Network Services

  1. Network Service Licenses

Open Data Licenses

Aimed at placing work into the public domain. The public domain has a very specific meaning in a legal context: It means that there are no copyright or other IP rights over the work

  1. Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)
  2. Public Doman Dedication Certificate (PDDC)
  3. Creative Commons Zero

Also:

  1. ODbL
  2. ODC-Attribution licence

Open Design and Manufacturing / Hardware

  1. Recommended Open Hardware Licenses‎
  2. Open Design License Agreement
  3. Open Hardware Licenses
  4. TAPR Open Hardware License
  5. CERN Open Hardware License
  6. Talis Community License
  7. Three-Dimensional Printing Open License

Other

  1. General Public License for Plant Germplasm

Pages in category "Licensing"

The following 200 pages are in this category, out of 239 total.

(previous page) (next page)
(previous page) (next page)