Posts Tagged ‘licenses’
Legal Tools in Creating an Open Source Project and Business Model
I explained a number of legal tools that are needed (or should at least be considered) when setting up an open source project or a business model in an article published in Symbio’s publication. It was based on my presentation at Openmind 2010 (Helsinki).
“The legal rules often play a key role when it comes to business models in software businesses andnotably in free and open source software projects. This is particularly true when the project owner wants to maintain some level of control over the software and the project itself. The balance between control and freedom is achieved by legal tools and policies, such as licenses, compliance policies,contracts, trademarks, organisation rules, contribution policies, only to name a few.” Full article at Symbio’s site: http://www.symbio.com/techblog/?p=307.
10 myyttiä avoimen lähdekoodin juridiikasta ja riskeistä
Artikkeli: 10 myyttiä avoimen lähdekoodin juridiikasta ja riskeistä
Näkökulma: Artikkelin myytit on valittu ison organisaation ostajan näkökulmasta, joskin myytit ovat tätä yleisempiä.
A. Johdanto
Avoin lähdekoodi tietojärjestelmissä ei ole ihmeellinen tai uusi asia. Avoimen lähdekoodin hyödyntämisessä on kyse ohjelmistoista, siinä missä suljetun lähdekoodin hyödyntämisessäkin.
Avointa lähdekoodia ei tule kohdella kuin jotain erityistä ilmiötä, sitä tulee kohdella ohjelmistoina. Ohjelmistoja on hyviä ja huonoja ja niiden lisensiointi voi olla yritykselle sopivaa tai epäsopivaa. Tämä soveltuu sekä avoimiin että suljettuihin ohjelmistoihin. Yrityksen tulee katsoa yksittäisiä ohjelmistoja ja niiden soveltuvuutta yrityksen tarkoituksiin. Yrityksen ei yleensä ole järkevää lukittautua yhteen ohjelmistoon tai yhteen lisensiointimalliin.
Ohjelmistoja tulee arvioida samoin kriteerein, olivat ne avoimia tai suljettuja. Arvioinnissa ohjelmiston avoimuus on käyttäjäyritykselle käytännössä aina vain etu, sillä avoimen ohjelmiston arviointi on helpompaa ja lisenssien myöntämä käyttämis-, muuttamis- ja monistamisvapaus on etu. Read the rest of this entry »
IFOSS L R issue 3 published
Ok: the third issue of IFOSS L R is now public. There are a number of interesting articles and writings:
1. Again, Andrew Katz writes a very pleasant to read book review. And this time, I need to get the book, too.
2. Andrew Sinclair writes a short article on BSD-license, tying the loose ends up. And I agree to the community view on BSD licenses permissions on modifying, reproducing and even sublicensing: it is there and Andrew just made it an IFOSSLR tad stronger.
Although there is a clear consensus that reproducing a work is permitted under BSD licenses, I have also been thinking that in the language of the BSD, “distribution” of software could be considered to include reproduction and distribution.
There is an interesting thread on GPL-compatibility, although Andrew could perhaps write a couple of paragraphs more on this.
3. Then there is my and Mikko-Pekka Partanen’s article on practical FOSS package compliance. I’m excited about the article and our work with Validos. I hope the article serves its purpose: takes a step towards a consensus on practical compliance conclusions. It was really an effort to get it finished in time for the publication, but we did it; and not least thanks to quick peer reviewers.
Then there is a number of other writings articles, but I haven’t had the time to read them yet…
Paris “GPL” case in IFOSSLR
The second issue of IFOSSLR was published yesterday.
Due to my blog on the Paris GPL case, I was actually asked to write a case law report to IFOSSLR. It was also published now.
I had the chance to read in advance Richard Kemp’s article Towards Free/Libre Open Source Software (“FLOSS”) Governance in the Organisation and heartily recommend it due to its building block approach and many examples.
I also just finished reading Andrew Katz’ book review on Law and the Internet and it surely was professional, but it was also entertaining!
Glad to see the publication flourishg: I and Mikko-Pekka Partanen are proposing a new article on open source compliance and the practical legal conclusions used in reviewing packages and source code and their license compliance. This is based on our work with Validos and has also a purpose to make public (and therefore subject to criticism and improvement) the compliance methodology used by Validos.
Recent Court Decision in Paris (referred as Paris GPL case)
Last week many internet news sources noted a decision by the Appeal Court of Paris (Arstechnica, FSF France). The news was largely around “an important case on GPL license enforceability”. I learnt that it might not be so and decided to look at the decision (Cour d’Appel de Paris, Pôle 5, Chambre 10, no: 294, issued on 16 Septmeber 2009). I do not know any other details of the case, nor have I looked at anything else than the 8 page long decision.
It’s a contract dispute regarding an IT-project. EDU 4 had won a contract (in 2000) and agreed to deliver a software (solution) to AFPA. In a series of many turns the parties presented their latest claims to the appeal court in April 2009. Basically EDU 4 claimed not to have breached the it-project contract and to be entitled to all payments and AFPA claimed breach of contract and that the vendor was not entitled to any more payments and that early termination of the contract was justified. Read the rest of this entry »
Open Source License Analyses by Students
I guided a number of law students (from a number of Finnish universities) in doing open source license analyses in connection with their thesis project.
The work was done in Finnish and the collection of analyses was published in August.
This was a continuum to the collaboration between our law firm and the universities. Earlier (in 2006), I guided a similar project. The newer project added a focus on patent terms.
Martin von Willebrand's Blog 