Re: ATLAS license discussion, please

> Guys,
>
> For some time now I've been wrestling with the idea of changing ATLAS's
> license, and I'm hoping you can help me make a good choice.  So, I'd
> like to open a discussion on what kind of free software license you would
> like to see ATLAS use going forward.
>
> Back when ATLAS first came out, there were basically two camps, which
> were the BSD and GNU camps.  I always saw both sides of the argument:
> BSD matches better the scientific tradition: here's the knowledge,
> free for all.  However, GNU said that openness and freedom are even
> more important than maximum access, so you can't do anything to remove them,
> and if you use it yourself, you usually have to contribute any advances
> you make.  There are a lot more subtleties, of course, but that was the
> broad strokes of my thoughts at the time.
>
> I come from a scientific tradition, so BSD was more natural to me.  The thing
> that finally decided me was that if you mix BSD and GNU, then the GNU
> overrides the BSD, which I found horribly coercive.  I didn't mind coercing
> evil-doers, but the BSD types were my types, and I didn't like this
> bit of strong-arming.  So, I released ATLAS with a BSD style license which
> both camps could easily use.
>
> When I chose the BSD license, there was no such thing as software patents.  I
> believe software patents are the scourge of our profession.  Because of them,
> everyone without literally millions of dollars is effectively a serf that is
> able to program only on the sufferance of our patent-wielding lords (even
> clearly invalid patents take millions to fight).  In this world of incredibly
> destructive patent wars we are now in, it is clear to me that I want a license
> that addresses this national (and now international) disaster in at least
> some way.
>
> I'm looking around, and it seems to me their are still the same two camps
> with the same basic differences.  The BSD camp is now called the Apache
> group, and GNU is still GNU.
>
> So, the obvious thing would be for me to change to the Apache 2 license,
> since it is closest to what I have and has some patent language.
>
> And yet, the more time has gone on, the more I've had to appreciate
> the principles behind GNU.  I have seen that the worst corporate
> actors gravitate to the BSD license, and that they typically abuse it,
> and that they slander the GNU camp.
>
> I am not considering at all using the GPL: as the author of a library,
> I do not want to force people to change their own projects to make
> use of it.  However, I am seriously thinking of switching to the LGPLv3.
> I'm a little concerned, because there are parts of it I cannot extract
> meaning from, and that worries me.  For instance:
>  If you modify a copy of the Library, and, in your modifications, a
>  facility refers to a function or data to be supplied by an Application
>  that uses the facility (other than as an argument passed when the
>  facility is invoked), then you may convey a copy of the modified
>  version:
>
> Huh?
>
> Then there are parts that just seem strange like:
>   You may not convey a covered work if you are a party to an arrangement with
>   a third party that is in the business of distributing software, under which
>   you make payment ....
>
> I see this is something against Novell/MS patent covenent, but why is it
> restricted to businesses that distribute software?
>
> I'm sure all these answers are right out there on the web, so educational
> links are welcome!
>
> Anyway, right now, the three main contenders are status quo (BSD), Apache 2,
> and LGPLv3.  I would greatly appreciate hearing your pro/con on them.
> I am highly motivated to try to address patents in some way, so BSD right
> now is not looking good to me, so if it is important to you, you'd better
> talk to me about it!
>
> The apache patent clause seems incredibly weak to me, unfortunately.
> It appears to say that if you sue someone over a patent in the software,
> that you lose the right to use other contributors patents.  Since I think
> owning software patents is morally wrong, and almost everyone I know doing
> real development work owns 0 software patents, this seems pretty useless
> for individuals (I see why a corporation would like it).  Why doesn't use
> of the copyrighted software constitute an agreement not to sue anyone
> over patents involved in the use of the software (be a violation of the
> *copyright* license)?  Am I reading that wrong?
>
> Even LGPL's patent language is not hard-core enough for me, but they
> address it in the preamble where they say this is as much as they
> think they can do.  Their language seems to say that if you are using
> the patent to prohibit others using the software then you never had a right
> to use the software in the first place, not just that your patent rights
> are severed.
>
> Anyway, I have many areas of ignorance and concern, but let me leave it
> there for now.  If you care about ATLAS's license, now is the time to
> make your voice heard.  If you've dreamed of LGPL, please tell me why.
> If BSD or Apache is the way to go, please share your reasoning.  If you
> work at a company, and a switch to certain licenses would hurt you,
> I want to hear about it, and why it is that it would hurt.
>
> Finally, please point me at other licenses you think are worth considering
> (I want to use a fairly standard one to make it easy on other free software
> folks).
>
> If you know others people with an interest in the license ATLAS uses
> who do not usually read the developer list, please feel free to cross-post
> that I'm asking these questions and want to hear from them.
>
> Many thanks,
> Clint
>
> **************************************************************************
> ** R. Clint Whaley, PhD ** Assist Prof, UTSA ** www.cs.utsa.edu/~whaley **
> **************************************************************************
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE!
> Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better
> price-free! And you'll get a free "Love Thy Logs" t-shirt when you
> download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Math-atlas-devel mailing list
> Math-atlas-devel@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/math-atlas-devel
>