Contriburor licencing

[timthelion]

Hey, thanks a lot for open sourcing this!

I noticed that you licence this code commercially, however you have no contributor agreement. Have you read the article on selling exceptions? You may need to ask your contributors to agree to let you sell.

I just wanted to point this out, so that no confusion arises.

Tim

[asicguy]

Thanks. I will take a look. This is my first time through this process.
-Frank

From: Timothy Hobbs <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: asicguy/gplgpu <reply@reply.github.commailto:reply@reply.github.com>
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2014 at 5:28 AM
To: asicguy/gplgpu <gplgpu@noreply.github.commailto:gplgpu@noreply.github.com>
Subject: [gplgpu] Contriburor licencing (#2)

Hey, thanks a lot for open sourcing this!

I noticed that you licence this code commercially, however you have no contributor agreement. Have you read the article on selling exceptionshttps://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/assigning-copyright? You may need to ask your contributors to agree to let you sell.

I just wanted to point this out, so that no confusion arises.

Tim

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/2.

[timthelion]

Basically, the thing is, that you don't own the copyright to the
contributions of others, so you have to ask their permission to be able to
include their commits in any commercially licensed version of the GPU you
decide to sell.  But right now, you aren't asking them their permission.  Of
course you don't lose copyright of your own work :), but once others start
contributing you might end up in the situation that you would have to remove
their contributions in order to commercially license. Make sense?

Tim

---------- Původní zpráva ----------
Od: asicguy notifications@github.com
Komu: asicguy/gplgpu gplgpu@noreply.github.com
Datum: 3. 8. 2014 12:23:15
Předmět: Re: [gplgpu] Contriburor licencing (#2)

"
Thanks. I will take a look. This is my first time through this process.
-Frank

From: Timothy Hobbs <notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.
com>>
Reply-To: asicguy/gplgpu <reply@reply.github.com<mailto:reply@reply.github.
com>>
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2014 at 5:28 AM
To: asicguy/gplgpu <gplgpu@noreply.github.com<mailto:gplgpu@noreply.github.
com>>
Subject: [gplgpu] Contriburor licencing (#2)

Hey, thanks a lot for open sourcing this!

I noticed that you licence this code commercially, however you have no
contributor agreement. Have you read the article on selling exceptions<
https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/assigning-copyright>? You may need to ask your
contributors to agree to let you sell.

I just wanted to point this out, so that no confusion arises.

Tim

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<https://github.com/
/issues/2>.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
(#2 (comment)).

"

[asicguy]

Hi Tim,
Makes sense. I added some language to the wiki regarding this. Hopefully it sounds OK. I’m just trying to strike a balance with GPLing the code so people can learn and play, but still allow sales to some vertical markets. It would be nice if more companies would do this with older code, although I think there are very few that would do this (OpenSparc is the only other one I know).
Thanks,
Frank

From: Timothy Hobbs <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: asicguy/gplgpu <reply@reply.github.commailto:reply@reply.github.com>
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2014 at 9:59 AM
To: asicguy/gplgpu <gplgpu@noreply.github.commailto:gplgpu@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Francis Bruno <fbruno@asicsolutions.commailto:fbruno@asicsolutions.com>
Subject: Re: [gplgpu] Contriburor licencing (#2)

Basically, the thing is, that you don't own the copyright to the
contributions of others, so you have to ask their permission to be able to
include their commits in any commercially licensed version of the GPU you
decide to sell. But right now, you aren't asking them their permission. Of
course you don't lose copyright of your own work :), but once others start
contributing you might end up in the situation that you would have to remove
their contributions in order to commercially license. Make sense?

Tim

---------- Pùvodní zpráva ----------
Od: asicguy <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com>
Komu: asicguy/gplgpu <gplgpu@noreply.github.commailto:gplgpu@noreply.github.com>
Datum: 3. 8. 2014 12:23:15
Pøedmìt: Re: [gplgpu] Contriburor licencing (#2)

"
Thanks. I will take a look. This is my first time through this process.
-Frank

From: Timothy Hobbs <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.
com>>
Reply-To: asicguy/gplgpu <reply@reply.github.commailto:reply@reply.github.com<mailto:reply@reply.github.
com>>
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2014 at 5:28 AM
To: asicguy/gplgpu <gplgpu@noreply.github.commailto:gplgpu@noreply.github.com<mailto:gplgpu@noreply.github.
com>>
Subject: [gplgpu] Contriburor licencing (#2)

Hey, thanks a lot for open sourcing this!

I noticed that you licence this code commercially, however you have no
contributor agreement. Have you read the article on selling exceptions<
https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/assigning-copyright>? You may need to ask your
contributors to agree to let you sell.

I just wanted to point this out, so that no confusion arises.

Tim

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<https://github.com/
/issues/2>.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
(#2 (comment)).

"

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/2#issuecomment-50991186.

[timthelion]

It seems fine. I'm not a lawyer though, I just am really enthusiastic about open source, and therefore don't want you to have a bad time :). Sun Microsystems did this style of opensource+comercial licensing for openoffice. You can see their contributor agreement here: https://www.openoffice.org/licenses/jca.pdf . There is some discussion here, http://blog.robla.net/2010/thoughts-on-dual-licensing-and-contrib-agreements/ . Ect. It's a throughly written about topic. I think you should read about it some.

But I'll repeat, I'm not an expert on this, I'm just really happy that you were generous enough to release this code, and I want you to have a pleasant open sourcing experience.

[asicguy]

Thanks. I agree that I would like it to go smoothly too. I’ll read up on it.
I am hoping that if this can be successful, maybe others will follow suit. As much as I like designing new hardware, I have a fascination for retro computing.
Fell free to spread the word around about the core. I’d like to get some more views!
Thanks again,
Frank

From: Timothy Hobbs <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: asicguy/gplgpu <reply@reply.github.commailto:reply@reply.github.com>
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2014 at 2:06 PM
To: asicguy/gplgpu <gplgpu@noreply.github.commailto:gplgpu@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Francis Bruno <fbruno@asicsolutions.commailto:fbruno@asicsolutions.com>
Subject: Re: [gplgpu] Contriburor licencing (#2)

It seems fine. I'm not a lawyer though, I just am really enthusiastic about open source, and therefore don't want you to have a bad time :). Sun Microsystems did this style of opensource+comercial licensing for openoffice. You can see their contributor agreement here: https://www.openoffice.org/licenses/jca.pdf . There is some discussion here, http://blog.robla.net/2010/thoughts-on-dual-licensing-and-contrib-agreements/ . Ect. It's a throughly written about topic. I think you should read about it some.

But I'll repeat, I'm not an expert on this, I'm just really happy that you were generous enough to release this code, and I want you to have a pleasant open sourcing experience.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/2#issuecomment-50997889.

[kallisti5]

Another option is going MIT. That way commercial use is allowed, and you don't have to worry about contributor agreements.. Then again the project is called gplgpu :P

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License

[asicguy]

Commercial use is allowed, they just have to open source their designs.
-Frank

From: Alexander von Gluck IV <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: asicguy/gplgpu <reply@reply.github.commailto:reply@reply.github.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM
To: asicguy/gplgpu <gplgpu@noreply.github.commailto:gplgpu@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Francis Bruno <fbruno@asicsolutions.commailto:fbruno@asicsolutions.com>
Subject: Re: [gplgpu] Contriburor licencing (#2)

Another option is going MIT. That way commercial use is allowed, and you don't have to worry about contributor agreements.. Then again the project is called gplgpu :P

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/2#issuecomment-60101368.