Re: ATLAS license discussion, please

>>I should think it is fairly similar, however it was constructed by lawyers specifically
>>to ensure commercial use and standardisation was possible since the developers
>>were both commercial users and participants in the C++ standardisation process
>>intending to develop libraries for both uses.
>
> But since my main reason is patents, and that license doesn't mention patents
> in anyway, I don't see what the use is?
>
>>>> If you take the GNU path you're
>>>> *endorsing* the kind of legal system that also supports software
>>>> patents and authoritarianism.
>>>
>>> You will have explain that, because I truly see no logical way to reach
>>> that conclusion.
>>
>>If you outright reject the right of any body to govern or own
>>any kind of intellectual property, then you would not be able to leverage
>>copyright laws to establish "copyleft". If you choose to simply make source
>>code available freely without legal nonsense, you are to some extent
>>denying such authority as opposed to endorsing it.
>
> I don't think that even begins to fly.  In any event, it is software patents
> that I think are entirely bogus and a wholly a bad.  Copyright is a completely
> different animal.
>
>>> I don't mind people using ATLAS in proprietary products, but I must admit
>>> I'd like to get some credit and I would hope they would contribute
>>> patches, etc., since they are benefiting from that work.
>>
>>The question is whether you would attempt to  enforce that requirement
>>via the legal system (i.e. chose a GNU licence) and thereby exclude
>>the incorporation of derived works into closed source software.
>
> Not denying incorporation is why there's a LGPL vs. GPL.
>
>>Please see the "quotation marks" around the word "forced", it wasn't
>>meant literally. Perhaps I could have explained this better.
>
> Yes, to my poor eyes you seem to have gotten the forced backwards :)
>
>>> Apple appears to me to be a primary example of this: suing everyone for
>>> BS like software & design patents, acquiring more patents to lock out
>>> others from compitition, using open source software but never giving
>>> back to it except where such a gift is to their exclusive benefit.
>>
>>Yes, however consider this: has Linux been successful breaking Microsofts
>>stronghold on the OS market? No. It has a nice niche market.
>
> Depends on where you sit.  In HPC, MS is niche and linux is overwhelmingly
> dominant (something >90% of the top500 machines run linux).  If you look
> at servers, MS is not dominant (good mix of linux, MS, and even old-school
> unix).  I think you are talking about desktop/laptop use where MS is
> overwhelmingly dominant.
>
>>Has Apple? No, but it is well on the way, by choosing to provide the "Mac"
>>GUI interface for consumers but Unix underneath for techno-geeks including
>>much of the open source software base.
>
> Last time I checked, the number of Mac OS users on the desktop was roughly
> the same percentage as Linux, but I'm not sure what this has to do with
> anything . . .
>
>>> I am also considering that in a world where many developers are controlled
>>> by sociopathic corporations, it is necessary to put restrictions on your
>>> software so that it is not used by those corporations to destroy the
>>> freedom of others to develop code.  When they are willing to so nakedly
>>> restrain the freedom of others, it becomes more important to make sure
>>> your contributions do not help them destroy what you believe in.
>>
>>Of course that is your judgement, because you are also preventing others
>>who may agree with your view of these corporations but choose to use
>>a different licence from using your software.
>
> That will obviously depend on the license and what they are doing.
>
>>Oh .. and of course .. you aren't preventing those corporations doing what
>>they like, just making it illegal (which is not the same as preventing them
>>unless you can fund a suitable action against them if they do indeed
>>violate your licence).
>
> Even though corps often ignore laws, it is usually a risk assessment.
>
>>The problem I would have with LGPL is that if I build an interface to LGPL
>>software it is a derived work and must be open source. I don't care about
>>that myself but it means my software *using* that interface is less appealing
>>to my target audience which is everyone *including closed source commercial
>>developers*. I want my software to be FFAU (free for any use). To maintain
>>that status I cannot permit any software included (in the core) to be
>>tainted with (L)GPL like licences.
>
> Something like this was how I came to use BSD in the first place.  The fact
> that it forced BSD to change its license along with forcing the corps to
> do things irritated me.  However, I do see why they do what the do, and
> I haven't seen any better approach for stopping anti-social behavior
> that is easier on other types of free software, unfortunately.
>
>>In fact my core product uses Ocaml, and Ocaml uses libraries with
>>LGPL "with linking exception" licence: a special exception is made
>>to allow static linkage of library code without impediment.
>
> Thanks very much for this pointer!  If I do decide to change to the
> LGPL, it is clear I would need to make *at least* that modification to
> it.  I've downloaded ocaml and scoped how it made the relaxation.
> Very interesting.
>
>>> However, the LGPL would require that we pass this requirement along as
>>> an obligation to our customers.
>>
>>That's the problem I see in a nutshell. It's not the users of ATLAS that
>>care but *their* users.
>
> OK, so the problem that you guys are bringing out is this:
> (1) You use ATLAS in a library that you sell to company B
> (2) Company B gets a license to sell you library bundled with theirs, but
>    because they are redistributing the ATLAS you have modified, then they
>    must make your ATLAS source available?
>
> 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
>