Re: [ng-spice-devel] License issues


To ng-spice-devel@ieee.ing.uniroma1.it
From Erik de Castro Lopo <erikd@zip.com.au>
Date Thu, 27 Apr 2000 21:16:43 +0000
Delivered-To mailing list ng-spice-devel@ieee.ing.uniroma1.it
Mailing-List contact ng-spice-devel-help@ieee.ing.uniroma1.it; run by ezmlm
Organization Erik Conspiracy Secret Labs
References <Pine.LNX.3.96.1000427131606.13544A-100000@ieee.ing.uniroma1.it >
Reply-To ng-spice-devel@ieee.ing.uniroma1.it
Sender erikd@zip.com.au

Paolo Nenzi wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 26 Apr 2000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> 
> > Here is the letter from the mailing list archive. I suggest you
> > hold off sending it until we find out the specifics of the
> > incompatiblity of the SPICE license with the GPL. I have contacted
> > Richard Stallman in regard to this and he has replied asking for
> > a copy of the current SPICE license. I send the contents of the
> > COPYING file from the rework-10 release.
>
> Ok, you are right.

I think its important to note that the license in the COPYING file
is not the normal BSD license but one of many variations.

Anyway, RMS has now replied. The problem with the current license is that
it only allows use for "educational, research and non-profit purposes".
The license does not carry the usual onerous advertising clause.

> > When we get RMS's opinion as to what is wrong with the current
> > license we can then explain to UCB what specifically is wrong,
> > how it can be fixed and the benefits of fixing it.
>
> There is a page on the GNU website concerning this problem:
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses

It has moved here:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html

> 
> 
> > This should be relatively easy to sell to UCB. We will make the point
> > that there are numerous commercial verisons of SPICE based on their
> > code.
>
> They have already a new version of the BSD license, the real problem is
> that it cannot be applied automatically to old software, there must be a
> some form of formal act.

This is the one known as the modified BDS license which can be found
here:

http://www.xfree86.org/3.3.3/COPYRIGHT5.html

Rather than simply ask for a change to this license, I suggest
we specifically point out the problems with the current license
and suggest a few alternatives including the GPL and the BSD
license above. 

The ideal situation would be if we could convince them that the 
SPICE3f5 code could be licensed under the modified BSD license
or the GPL at the choice of the user. 

Obviously for a concession like this to come from UCB we have to state
our case very strongly. I would be happy to help work on the letter.

> > The proliferation of many versions has resulted in
> > incompatibility between versions and that we hope to generate a free,
> > open source industry standard verion of SPICE. Most importantly,
> > this will provide students with a fully free, uncrippled, open
> > source SPICE.
> 
> Sangiovanni was interested and asked me (us) to sedn a leter to Berkeley
> about our project, may be thay even link us in their spice page.

I glad we have already made contact with them. This should smooth
our way.

Ciao,
Erik
-- 
+-------------------------------------------------+
     Erik de Castro Lopo     erikd@zip.com.au
+-------------------------------------------------+
"Every time microshaft's stock price drops again, I rejoice. I want to see 
that 
bunch of criminals brought to their knees. Preferably at the chopping block."
-- rixt in http://linuxtoday.com/stories/20659_flat.html

Partial thread listing: