[Discuss] [OpenSCAD] License for scad files

[hrobeers]

Hi Johannes,

I believe that (L)GPL licenses do not make sense in the case of physical 
objects.
Even though scad files are code, they just describe a physical object.
You cannot license objects by licensing their description.
The objects will be copied anyway.

I believe that a BSD style license would be more suitable and compatible 
with CC.

Hans

Op dinsdag 29 oktober 2013 22:57:34 UTC+1 schreef Bryan Bishop:
>
>
> From: Johannes Reinhardt <jrein... at ist-dein-freund.de <javascript:>>
> Date: Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 4:55 PM
> Subject: [OpenSCAD] License for scad files
> To: "open... at rocklinux.org <javascript:>" <open... at rocklinux.org<javascript:>
> >
>
>
> Hi everybody,
>
> while working on BOLTS, I started to think about licensing and scad
> code and realised that this is a quite complicated topic. I am not a
> lawyer, so I struggled quite a bit with that. Licenses are of some
> importance to BOLTS, because I want to make sure, that existing code
> can be incorporated with little effort, and for that I have to make
> sure that this is legally possible.
>
> I reached a state where I think I understood and then tried to write it
> up:
>
> http://jreinhardt.github.io/BOLTS/doc/general/licensing.html
>
> However, today I thought about it from another perspective and
> struggled again, so I decided to ask for your expertise, maybe you can
> point out if I misunderstood something.
>
> The main problem for me is that scad code is somehow both code and
> content. On the one hand one can see a scad file as something that is
> a description of an object, just like a stl file. If you look at it
> like that, then a CC license makes perfect sense.
>
> On the other hand, scad code is very much code. You can have a scad
> library that is not a description of an object. For that, I feel, a
> license tailored towards code, like the GPL or LGPL is better suited.
> MCAD for example is LGPL.
>
> But CC and (L)GPL are incompatible, which means that one cannot use them
> together. Unfortunately, a lot of the scad code that is around is CC
> licensed, because the standard license on thingiverse is CC. I find
> this very unsatisfactory that the available scad code is fragmented
> into legally incompatible subsets.
>
> Greetings
>
> Johannes
>
>
> --
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenSCAD mailing list
> Open... at rocklinux.org <javascript:>
> http://rocklinux.net/mailman/listinfo/openscad
> http://openscad.org - https://flattr.com/thing/121566
>
>
>
> -- 
> - Bryan
> http://heybryan.org/
> 1 512 203 0507 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20131030/f5cf4647/attachment.html>