Re: [oc] GNU LGPL license

[Richard Herveille <richard@asics.ws>]

There are many more GNU compatible licenses, that could solve this problem 
(the X10 or X11 licenses for example).
BSD, or better the original BSD license, has a nasty claim in it, in that it 
requires to list the contributors/authors. Imagine a SoC made from OpenCores 
IPs, where you have to list all authors/contributors !!!!!

> My vote is to continue using the
> GPL, LGPL or BSD license.  If each
> author starts modifying licenses,
> soon we will have a legal minefield,
> with dozens of designs using slightly
> different licenses.  The resulting
> confusion will DISCOURAGE people from
> using opencores, as they will never be
> sure of their legal status.
>
> My suggestion:
>
> Use the BSD license if you want companies
> to use your work in their proprietory
> designs.
>
> Use the LGPL if you want to go halfway.  The LGPL
> would probably prevent a core from being used in
> a closed source ASIC, but I would think it could be used
> in an FPGA if the user provided bitstreams for the
> closed source sections of the design.
>
> Use the GPL if you wish to encourage
> full access to source.
>
>
> Surely this accomodates the full spectrum:
> from those who want their work to appear in
> proprietory designs to those who wish
> to promote a 'free software' ethos?
>
> These three licenses are compatible, and so make
> mixing and matching cores simple.
>
> A lot has been written about the subject of this
> thread in the 'philosophy' pages of the Free
> Software Foundation:
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/
> There is also reading material, with less
> emphasis on the freedom aspects, on the
> opensource web site:
> http://www.opensource.org/
>
> Regards
> John
--
To unsubscribe from cores mailing list please visit http://www.opencores.org/mailinglists.shtml