[Psc] [Fwd: Re: IP and Licensing Questions]
Tim Schaub
tschaub at opengeo.org
Thu Jun 4 19:18:22 CEST 2009
Hey-
Eric Lemoine wrote:
> No answer on the license of the application using Ext. What a shame!
> Should we go to the FSS to get answers? Yves Moisan is a member of
> FSS, and he's proposed to relay licensing questions to FSS.
>
Yeah, I was happy just to finally get a response. And at least now we
don't run the risk of having to change the name after our release.
Adam does indicate that "we can work with you a little on the licensing
statements."
I take this to mean that if we interpret what we can they will help
correct any mis-statements.
So, if anybody can make some time to turn
http://www.geoext.org/trac/geoext/wiki/license into a better licensing
FAQ, we can have the Ext folks review it.
I wrote back to Adam to say we would run our material by them again
after we finish it up. He said that sounded like a good plan.
So, I think our task is now to put more questions and answers on this
page http://www.geoext.org/trac/geoext/wiki/license.
If anybody else has any time for this, please step up. I'll try to put
a bit of time into it early next week.
Tim
> On Thursday, June 4, 2009, Tim Schaub <tschaub at opengeo.org> wrote:
>> Good news (at last)...
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [Psc] IP and Licensing Questions
>> Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 21:30:09 -0400
>> From: Adam Mishcon <adam at extjs.com>
>> To: Tim Schaub <tschaub at opengeo.org>
>> References: <4A09F9C3.5090708 at opengeo.org>
>> <4A1D6B86.8060102 at opengeo.org>
>> <670554c0905280843m491c7ecub6b429fae374d9d9 at mail.gmail.com>
>> <4A1EB711.5090804 at opengeo.org> <4A270BB6.8070107 at opengeo.org>
>>
>>
>>
>> Tim:
>>
>> I finally got a chance to talk with Abe about GeoExt and he is a big
>> fan. No problem with the name and we'll send you something official
>> shortly. If you'd like, we can work with you a little on the licensing
>> statements - Ext will need to be clearly GPL even if GeoExt is
>> alternative licensed under a FLOSS exception.
>>
>> Just let me know how we can help. And we wish you the very best.
>>
>> ~ Adam
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Tim Schaub <tschaub at opengeo.org
>> <mailto:tschaub at opengeo.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Adam-
>>
>> We are pushing towards an initial release of GeoExt next week.
>> Though it would be great to have clarification on the licensing
>> questions, it is most important for us to make sure the name
>> "GeoExt" is ok to use.
>>
>> As we get a better understanding of the licensing, we can change our
>> licensing FAQ. However, we don't want to change the project name
>> after advertising the release.
>>
>> Thanks for any answers you are able to provide. Also, if you have
>> responded with any answers, please let me know - I have an
>> overzealous spam filter that I haven't completely tamed, and I want
>> to make sure I haven't missed your response.
>>
>> Again, the draft website: http://docs.opengeo.org/geoext/
>>
>> Thanks for your attention to this.
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>> Tim Schaub wrote:
>>
>> Hey-
>>
>> Adam Mishcon wrote:
>>
>> Tim:
>>
>> Checking with Abe...
>>
>>
>> Thanks Adam. And of course the gmap demo linked below should be
>>
>> http://extjs.com/deploy/dev/examples/window/gmap.html
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> ~ Adam
>>
>> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Tim Schaub
>> <tschaub at opengeo.org <mailto:tschaub at opengeo.org>
>> <mailto:tschaub at opengeo.org <mailto:tschaub at opengeo.org>>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Adam-
>>
>> Thanks for your response last week. I'm following up to
>> see if you
>> have been able to have any discussion about these questions.
>>
>> While I don't want to bog this down by throwing in more
>> questions,
>> I'm tempted to add one more. Please let me know if there
>> is a
>> better forum for licensing discussion.
>>
>> Additional question regarding the open source exemption for
>> applications:
>>
>> If someone were to host an application that is a Google
>> "Maps API
>> Implementation" (e.g.
>>
>> http://localhost/projects/ext-2.2/examples/window/gmap.html),
>> is it
>> correct that the application would *not* qualify for the
>> open source
>> exemption for applications (because the gmap api code
>> does not
>> satisfy point 2.b.i on
>> http://extjs.com/products/floss-exception.php)?
>>
>> If so, the implication is that someone would need to
>> purchase a
>> commercial license if they wanted to host a page similar
>> to the one
>> above, correct?
>>
>> Please let me know if I am misinterpreting this
>> documentation. I
>> appreciate your help with these questions.
>>
>> Thanks again,
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> Tim Schaub wrote:
>>
>> Hello-
>>
>> I am writing on behalf of a community of developers
>> working on a
>> project that extends ExtJS (2.x) classes with mapping
>> functionality from the OpenLayers library. We have a
>> number of
>> questions related to licensing (and intellectual
>> property) that
>> we are hoping to get answers on.
>>
>> First, we have been calling our project GeoExt, and
>> wanted to
>> make sure the name was appropriate for us to use.
>> Below is a
>> mockup of our issue tracker with a logo at the head.
>>
>>
>> http://img.skitch.com/20090409-jksimuqt2axkrciw386bx2n3f4.png.
>>
>> Please let us know if the name and look of the logo are
>> acceptable for us to use.
>>
>> Our library [1] extends Ext components and data
>> utilities with
>> mapping functionality from OpenLayers [2]. Our plan
>> has been to
>> distribute GeoExt under a BSD license and to include
>> OpenLayers
>> (with a BSDish license) in our releases. We will
>> provide
>> instructions with our releases on obtaining Ext from
>> extjs.com <http://extjs.com>
>> <http://extjs.com>. Our understanding is that we
>> meet the terms
>> of the Open Source License Exception for Development
>> [3].
>>
>>
>> We have received some questions from interested
>> application
>> developers regarding licensing of applications built
>> with GeoExt
>> and Ext. I'll enumerate them below. Thanks for any
>> answers you
>> are able to provide.
>>
>>
>> 1) If an application includes a script that is a
>> minified
>> version of the
>> Ext source and is not produced by the Ext build tools
>> [4] (e.g.
>> minified
>> with YUICompressor), I assume this is considered
>> "Conveying
>> Non-Source
>> Forms" and not "Conveying Modified Source Versions"
>> under GPL
>> v3. Is
>> this assumption correct?
>>
>> If so, the GPL says the object code provider must
>> also convey the
>> machine-readable source. One of the ways this can be
>> done is to
>> offer
>> access to the source from a designated place (point
>> 6.d). Is it
>> enough
>> for the application provider to include a notice in
>> the minified
>> code
>> that references the license and gives instruction to
>> download
>> the source
>> from Ext? I'm assuming the application provider
>> doesn't have to
>> provide
>> access to anything else themselves (e.g. the tools
>> used to
>> minify the
>> source or the source itself).
>>
>>
>> 2) A typical application would include Ext and
>> application code
>> that calls Ext methods. The Open Source License
>> Exception for
>> Applications [5] suggests that code that is
>> independent of the
>> library may be distributed under one of the listed
>> licenses
>> (point 2.a and the paragraph preceding it). Is
>> application code
>> that relies on Ext (calls methods and accesses
>> properties)
>> considered independent and can this code be
>> distributed under
>> one of the listed licenses (assuming other terms are
>> met)?
>>
>>
>> Thanks for your responses. We're excited to be using
>> Ext and to
>> be introducing developers of mapping applications to
>> a rich new
>> set of features.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> [1] http://svn.geoext.org/core/trunk/geoext/lib/
>> [2] http://openlayers.org/
>> [3] http://extjs.com/products/ux-exception.php
>> [4] http://extjs.com/products/extjs/build/
>> [5] http://extjs.com/products/floss-exception.php
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Tim Schaub
>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>> Expert service straight from the developers.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> This communication is being provided for informational
>> purposes only and does not constitute a binding offer on the
>> part of Ext JS LLC or its affiliates. Neither is this e-mail
>> to be construed as either amending any agreement between
>> sender and recipient, or creating terms and conditions other
>> than those contained in a definitive agreement between the
>> parties.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Tim Schaub
>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>> Expert service straight from the developers.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> This communication is being provided for informational purposes only and
>> does not constitute a binding offer on the part of Ext JS LLC or its
>> affiliates. Neither is this e-mail to be construed as either amending
>> any agreement between sender and recipient, or creating terms and
>> conditions other than those contained in a definitive agreement between
>> the parties.
>>
>> --
>> Tim Schaub
>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>> Expert service straight from the developers.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Psc mailing list
>> Psc at geoext.org
>> http://www.geoext.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/psc
>>
>
--
Tim Schaub
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
More information about the Psc
mailing list