wiki.openmod-initiative.org - User contributions [en]

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Munich 2017

2017-10-11T07:59:38Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* General scientific computing (entry level) */

This is the wiki page for the upcoming 7th Workshop of the Open Energy Modelling Initiative, a grass-roots organization of modellers from various research institutes, universities and companies. The workshop will take place in '''Garching/Munich, Germany''' hosted by the [http://www.ens.ei.tum.de/en Chair of Renewable and Sustainable Energy Systems] of the Technical University of Munich (see [[Events|Events]] for previous workshops). The workshop will take place on '''12-13 October 2017''', with an optional tutorial day before on '''11 October 2017'''. Since the workshop is run by volunteers, there is no registration fee, so feel free to join! 

This wiki page will be updated frequently with a programme and practical information. All participants are invited to contribute suggestions of different sessions to be included in the programme. In the meantime, feel free to register on the [https://forum.openmod-initiative.org/ forum] or [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative mailing list] where all things regarding energy modelling are discussed.

= About the workshop =

The openmod workshops provide a forum for modellers to come together and discuss how to further the use of open data and open software tools in the energy modelling community. Topics range from exchanges about specific types of data (e.g. sources for open data on building stocks or distribution networks) to advocacy and outreach.

Only a small part of the workshop consists of prepared presentations. For the rest of the workshop, participants work together in breakout groups on specific topics. The topics are chosen by the participants themselves, so please get actively involved by suggesting topics! To get the most out of the workshop, it is suggested to consider in advance what you would like to discuss.

Breakout groups should have specific aims, which can be followed up after the workshop, e.g. improving the openmod wiki pages, lobbying a data-holder to change its licencing, improving educational tools, or outreach.

= Practical Information =

'''Venue:''' Center for Energy and Information, [http://www.ens.ei.tum.de/en Chair of Renewable and Sustainable Energy Systems]

'''Getting there:''' The chair is located outside of Munich at Garching Forschungszentrum, which is the last station in the north of the [https://efa.mvv-muenchen.de/index.html#trip@enquiry subway U6]. Depending on where your hotel is, it can be up to 45 minutes to get from the city center to the campus. Our institute can also be reached by car, there are [https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/48.26419/11.66459 parking possibilites] at the campus.

'''Map:''' [https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369099969 OpenStreetMap]

'''Accommodation:''' If you want to travel to the campus by subway, try to find a hotel near the U6, as the public transportation network is centralized and there are only limited connections between the outer parts of the city. If you arrive by car, ensure that the hotel has parking opportunities or look for hotels outside of Munich, since parking is most of the times an issue in Munich. For bookings, try [https://www.airbnb.com/ airbnb], [https://booking.com booking.com] or [https://hrs.de HRS]. 

'''Lunch break:''' [[File:Lunch break.png|877px|RTENOTITLE]]
<div>© [http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright OpenStreetMap]-Mitwirkende</div>
#[https://gate-kitchen.de/speisekarte/speisekarte.html Gate Kitchen]: 3 different dishes on daily menu, sandwiches, salads
#Cafeteria Chemie: Snacks
#[http://www.herr-lichtenberg.de/tageskarte Herr Lichtenberg]: 3-4 different dishes on daily menu, sandwiches, salads, cake
#[http://www.studentenwerk-muenchen.de/mensa/speiseplan/speiseplan_524_-en.html#heute Cafeteria Mensa]: Different dishes on daily menu
#Cafe Crazy Bean: Pizza, snacks
#[http://www.studentenwerk-muenchen.de/mensa/speiseplan/speiseplan_527_-en.html#heute Cafeteria Maschinenwesen]: Different dishes on daily menu
#[http://www.gourmetimbiss.de/Resources/GI%Speisekarte.pdf Gourmet Imbiss]: Snacks, doner kebab
#[http://www.wilhelm-gastronomie.de/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Garching-Speiseplan_KW41_2017.pdf Cafeteria Mathematik]: 3 different dishes on daily menu

= Registration =

Registration is now closed. There are only 65 places for this workshop, so any additional registrations will be on the waiting list.

= Participants =

Everyone who has registered will be visible on the [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_09N9IAZtMaNbtddebiU76eNcCQI6zBiYBhwZqlhd_8/edit#gid=0 participant list] (without email addresses).

 

= Programme =

== Day 1: Optional Tutorials (Wednesday 11 October 2017) ==

On the day before the main official workshop, optional tutorials will be organised for students and researchers who are new to scientific computing and energy system modelling.

The tutorials will be split into two streams: "General Scientific Computing" and "Advanced Topics". Each stream will take place in separate rooms at ZEI, each of which has a maximum of 25 places available. 

 

 

 

=== General scientific computing (entry level) ===

09:30 - 10:00 — Welcome, Intro, Setup (Room 0002)

10:00 - 12:00 — Hands-on modeling session with oemof (Room 0002) 

12:00 - 13:00 — '''Lunch Break'''

13:00 - 14:30 — Open-Source GIS using QGIS (Room 0002) 

14:30 - 16:00 — Version Control with Git (Room 0002)

16:00 - 16:30 — '''Coffee Break'''

{| style="width: 100%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1"
|+ 
|-
! scope="col" style="width: 245px" | Tutorial 
! scope="col" style="width: 506px" | Instructions 
|-
| style="width: 245px" | Hands-on modeling session with oemof 
| style="width: 506px" |
For the oemof tutorial you need to have a running Python 3 environment. Secondly you need to install oemof and a solver. The following list explains how to do this. You'll find detailled information when you follow the links. If you have any questions or things are not working as expected please use the Q&A section in the openmod forum with tag #oemof. 

#Install oemof OR Python 3 and oemof 
##If you have a running Python 3 environment you install oemof via pip: [https://github.com/oemof/oemof#installing-oemof https://github.com/oemof/oemof#installing-oemof] 
##If you do not have a running Python 3 environment, look here for detailed information for Linux systems: [http://oemof.readthedocs.io/en/latest/installation_and_setup.html#using-linux-repositories-to-install-python http://oemof.readthedocs.io/en/latest/installation_and_setup.html#using-linux-repositories-to-install-python] ... and here for Windows systems: [http://oemof.readthedocs.io/en/latest/installation_and_setup.html#windows http://oemof.readthedocs.io/en/latest/installation_and_setup.html#windows]. For Windows user there even exists a Youtube Tutorial: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFvoM36_szM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFvoM36_szM]. (It is recommended to use a virtual Python environment and not to install all required packages globally on your system.)

#Install a solver: I recommend using CBC, because it's much faster than GLPK. Find guidelines her for Linux systems: [http://oemof.readthedocs.io/en/latest/installation_and_setup.html#solver http://oemof.readthedocs.io/en/latest/installation_and_setup.html#solver]... and here for Windows systems: [http://oemof.readthedocs.io/en/stable/installation_and_setup.html#windows-solver http://oemof.readthedocs.io/en/stable/installation_and_setup.html#windows-solver]
#You can test your installation as follows: [http://oemof.readthedocs.io/en/latest/installation_and_setup.html#run-examples-to-check-the-installation http://oemof.readthedocs.io/en/latest/installation_and_setup.html#run-examples-to-check-the-installation]

We also will use jupyter. Here you find installation instructions for both, Windows and Linux: [http://jupyter.org/install.html http://jupyter.org/install.html]

|-
| style="width: 245px" | Open-Source GIS using QGIS 
| style="width: 506px" |
[http://www.qgis.org/en/site/forusers/download.html http://www.qgis.org/en/site/forusers/download.html] QGIS Version 2.18

|-
| style="width: 245px" | Version Control with Git 
| style="width: 506px" |
1. Download and install Git for your Operating System 
   a. Linux: $PACKAGE_MANAGER install git 
      - Debian and Ubuntu: '''sudo apt-get install git''' 
      - Fedora: sudo yum install git 
      - others see: [https://git-scm.com/download/linux https://git-scm.com/download/linux] 
   b. Windows: 
      - Installer from [https://git-scm.com/download/win https://git-scm.com/download/win] 
   c. Max OS X: 
      - Installer from [http://git-scm.com/download/mac http://git-scm.com/download/mac]

2. Once installed, perform the steps for First-Time Git Setup from [https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Getting-Started-First-Time-Git-Setup https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Getting-Started-First-Time-Git-Setup]. 

----

'''INSTALLATION NOTE (FOR WINDOWS)''' 
On screen 'Adjusting your PATH environment', I strongly recommend to choose option 2, that means: 

   (x) Use Git from the Windows Command Prompt 

The other two options are either inconvenient (option 1) or too disruptive (option 3) for my taste. For all other screens, simply stick to the (sane) defaults, unless you know you prefer a non-default setting. 

'''GENERAL HINT (WINDOWS AGAIN)''' 
To quickly open a command prompt in Windows, I recommend the key combination <Win>+R, followed by the command 'cmd' and pressing <Enter>. From there, proceed to entering the commands starting 'git ...'

|}

 

 

=== Advanced topics ===

09:30 - 10:00 — Welcome, Intro, Setup (Room 0003)

10:00 - 12:00 — OpenEnergyPlatform and OpenEnergyDatabase (Room 0003) 

12:00 - 13:00 — '''Lunch Break'''

13:00 - 14:45 — Visualising data in Python (Room 0003) 

14:50 - 15:25 — Object-oriented energy system modeling with OOD and UML (Room 1002) 

15:30 - 16:00 — Open Licensing (Room 0003) 

16:00 - 16:30 — '''Coffee Break''' 

{| style="width: 100%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1"
|-
! scope="col" style="width: 245px" | Tutorial 
! scope="col" style="width: 506px" | Instructions 
|-
| style="width: 245px" | OEP and OEDB 
| style="width: 506px" |
*openmod profile [https://wiki.openmod-initiative.org/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin&returnto=Main+Page https://wiki.openmod-initiative.org/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin&returnto=Main+Page]
*login on '''OEP '''[http://oep.iks.cs.ovgu.de/login/?next=/ http://oep.iks.cs.ovgu.de/login/?next=/]
*Anaconda 
*download [[File:Requirement oep-api.zip|180px|https://wiki.openmod-initiative.org/wiki/File:Requirement_oep-api.zip|alt=https://wiki.openmod-initiative.org/wiki/File:Requirement_oep-api.zip]]
*"conda env create -f requirement_oep-api.yml"
*"activate oep-api"

|-
| style="width: 245px" | Visualising data in Python 
| style="width: 506px" | Please download and unzip the installation instructions: [[:File:Openmod Workshop Munich 2017 visualisation tutorial setup.zip|vis-tutorial-setup-Munich2017]] 
|-
| style="width: 245px" | OOD and UML 
| style="width: 506px" | No installation required 
|-
| style="width: 245px" | Open Licensing 
| style="width: 506px" | No installation required 
|}

 

 

=== Energy model introductions ===

Room: Main Auditorium 0001

This stream contains lectures introducing energy modelling frameworks.

16:30 - 17:00 — urbs

17:00 - 17:30 — rivus

17:30 - 18:00 — PyPSA

18:00 - 18:30 — Calliope

 

== Day 2: Main workshop (Thursday 12 October 2017) ==

Rooms: Main Auditorium 0001

In addition for breakout groups: seminar rooms 0002, 0003, 1002, 2002.

09:30 - 10:00 — '''Reception of workshop participants'''

10:00 - 10:30 — Welcome address and logistical information (Kais Siala)

10:30 - 10:45 — What is the Open Energy Modelling Initiative? (Berit Mueller)

10:45 - 11:15 — Introduction (everyone - moderation by Konrad Schönleber)

11:15 - 11:30 — Introducing break-out groups

11:30 - 12:00 — Break-out groups: organisation of where and when

12:00 - 13:00 — '''Lunch break'''

13:00 - 14:00 — Short presentations (4 mins + 2 mins discussion each)

14:00 - 15:45 — Break-out groups (four parallel sessions)

15:45 - 16:15 — '''Coffee break'''

16:15 - 18:00 — Break-out groups 2 (four parallel sessions)

 

== Day 3: Main workshop (Friday 13 October 2017) ==

Rooms: Main Auditorium 0001

In addition for breakout groups: seminar rooms 0002, 0003, 1002, 2002.

09:30 - 10:30 — Panel discussion with ENTSO-E representatives (moderation by Konrad Schönleber)

10:30 - 12:30 — Break-out groups (four parallel sessions)

12:30 - 13:30 — '''Lunch break'''

13:30 - 14:00 — Short presentations (4 mins + 2 mins discussion each)

14:00 - 15:00 — Reporting from the break-out groups

15:00 - 15:30 — '''Coffee break'''

15:30 - 16:30 — Wrap up, next workshop

16.30 — '''End of workshop'''

 

= Breakout groups =

The workshop is organised from and for modellers and stakeholders of the open energy modelling community who want to exchange and discuss about energy models, code, data, licenses, transparency, making results understandable to stakeholders, campaigning for open data, etc. If you are interested to discuss a special subject you can propose [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1m3hBT4o778cMGms-YWqElWKj4a2mj5LqYPVccrwg4sk/edit#gid=0 breakout groups] on the google sheet. Please communicate your ideas for new breakout groups and add your name to a group that you would like to join. You can add suggestions for the content either in the table or as a comment.

 

= Short presentations =

If you want to give a short presentation during the workshop (4 mins + 2 mins questions), e.g. a model introduction, please mention that when you register.

 

= Saturday event =

I don't know if there is anything officially planned for the final Saturday, but if you are in Munich with some time to spare, I would highly recommend a visit to the '''energy.transitions''' exhibition at the Deutsches Museum. See [http://www.deutsches-museum.de/en/exhibitions/special-exhibitions/energiewenden/ here]. Captioned in Deutsch and English. Opening hours are 9:00 to 17:00. For energy modelers, there is a system design game. But my favorite is the 1950s science kit for kids that shipped with radioactive uranium ore. (Robbie Morrison)

If you are staying in Munich over the weekend, consider going to the "Lange Nacht der Museen" (long night of museums). For about 15€ you can access almost all the museums of Munich from 7 p.m. till 2 a.m. (Kais Siala)

URBS

2017-01-12T14:46:45Z

Johannes Dorfner:

{{Model
|Full_Model_Name=urbs
|author_institution=TUM EI ENS
|authors=Johannes Dorfner; Magdalena Dorfner; Soner Candas; Sebastian Müller; Yunus Özsahin; Thomas Zipperle; Simon Herzog
|contact_persons=Johannes Dorfner
|contact_email=johannes.dorfner@tum.de
|website=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|source_download=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|text_description=urbs is a linear programming optimisation model for capacity expansion planning and unit commitment for distributed energy systems. Its name, latin for city, stems from its origin as a model for optimisation for urban energy systems. Since then, it has been adapted to multiple scales from neighbourhoods to continents.
|User documentation=http://urbs.readthedocs.io/
|Code documentation=http://urbs.readthedocs.io/
|open_source_licensed=Yes
|license=GNU General Public License version 3.0 (GPL-3.0)
|model_source_public=Yes
|Link to source=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|data_availability=some
|open_future=Yes
|modelling_software=Python (Pyomo)
|processing_software=Python (pandas et al)
|GUI=No
|model_class=Energy Modelling Framework,
|sectors=User-dependent, Electricity
|technologies=Renewables, Conventional Generation, CHP
|Demand sectors=Households, Industry, Commercial sector, Other
|Energy carrier (Gas)=Natural gas, Biogas, Hydrogen
|Energy carrier (Liquid)=Diesel, Ethanol, Petrol
|Energy carriers (Solid)=Biomass, Coal, Lignite, Uranium
|Energy carriers (Renewable)=Geothermal heat, Sun, Wind
|Transfer (Electricity)=Transmission
|Transfer (Gas)=Transmission
|Transfer (Heat)=Transmission
|Storage (Electricity)=Battery, CAES, Chemical, Kinetic, PHS
|Storage (Gas)=Yes
|Storage (Heat)=Yes
|Market models=N/A
|decisions=dispatch, investment
|georegions=User-dependent
|georesolution=User-dependent
|timeresolution=Hour
|network_coverage=transmission, net transfer capacities
|math_modeltype=Optimization
|math_modeltype_shortdesc=Linear optimization model of a user-defined reference energy system.
|math_objective=Minimise total discounted cost of system
|deterministic=None
|is_suited_for_many_scenarios=Yes
|number_of_variables=100000
|montecarlo=No
|computation_time_minutes=20
|computation_time_comments=Highly dependent on model size (esp. storage) and solver (CPLEX, GLPK, Gurobi)
|citation_references=Dorfner, Johannes (2016). "Open Source Modelling and Optimisation of Energy Infrastructure at Urban Scale", doctoral thesis, Technical University of Munich
|citation_doi=10.5281/zenodo.46118
|report_references=]]
* [http://mediatum.ub.tum.de/?id=1285570 Open Source Modelling and Optimisation of Energy Infrastructure at Urban Scale]; Johannes Dorfner; doctoral thesis, Technical University of Munich, 2016
* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/node?id=1171502 Electricity system optimization in the EUMENA region]; Matthias Huber, Johannes Dorfner, Thomas Hamacher; technical report, Munich, 2012
* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/doc/1233948/1233948.pdf Modelling a Low-Carbon Power System for Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore]; Juergen Stich, Melanie Mannhart, Thomas Zipperle, Tobias Massier, Matthias Huber, Thomas Hamacher; 33rd IEW International Energy Workshop, Peking, 2014
* [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.040 Transmission grid extensions for the integration of variable renewable energies in Europe: Who benefits where?]; Katrin Schaber, Florian Steinke, Thomas Hamacher; Energy Policy, Volume 43, April 2012, 123–135.
|Model input file format=No
|Model file format=No
|Model output file format=No
}}

URBS

2017-01-12T14:42:05Z

Johannes Dorfner:

{{Model
|Full_Model_Name=urbs
|author_institution=TUM EI ENS
|authors=Thomas Richter, Thomas Hamacher, Matthias Huber, Johannes Dorfner
|contact_persons=Johannes Dorfner
|contact_email=johannes.dorfner@tum.de
|website=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|source_download=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|text_description=urbs is a linear programming optimisation model for capacity expansion planning and unit commitment for distributed energy systems. Its name, latin for city, stems from its origin as a model for optimisation for urban energy systems. Since then, it has been adapted to multiple scales from neighbourhoods to continents.
|User documentation=http://urbs.readthedocs.io/
|Code documentation=http://urbs.readthedocs.io/
|open_source_licensed=Yes
|license=GNU General Public License version 3.0 (GPL-3.0)
|model_source_public=Yes
|Link to source=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|data_availability=some
|open_future=Yes
|modelling_software=Python (Pyomo)
|processing_software=Python (pandas et al)
|GUI=No
|model_class=Energy Modelling Framework,
|sectors=User-dependent, Electricity
|technologies=Renewables, Conventional Generation, CHP
|Demand sectors=Households, Industry, Commercial sector, Other
|Energy carrier (Gas)=Natural gas, Biogas, Hydrogen
|Energy carrier (Liquid)=Diesel, Ethanol, Petrol
|Energy carriers (Solid)=Biomass, Coal, Lignite, Uranium
|Energy carriers (Renewable)=Geothermal heat, Sun, Wind
|Transfer (Electricity)=Transmission
|Transfer (Gas)=Transmission
|Transfer (Heat)=Transmission
|Storage (Electricity)=Battery, CAES, Chemical, Kinetic, PHS
|Storage (Gas)=Yes
|Storage (Heat)=Yes
|Market models=N/A
|decisions=dispatch, investment
|georegions=User-dependent
|georesolution=User-dependent
|timeresolution=Hour
|network_coverage=transmission, net transfer capacities
|math_modeltype=Optimization
|math_modeltype_shortdesc=Linear optimization model of a user-defined reference energy system.
|math_objective=Minimise total discounted cost of system
|deterministic=None
|is_suited_for_many_scenarios=Yes
|number_of_variables=100000
|montecarlo=No
|computation_time_minutes=20
|computation_time_comments=Highly dependent on model size (esp. storage) and solver (CPLEX, GLPK, Gurobi)
|citation_doi=10.5281/zenodo.46118
|report_references=]]
* [http://mediatum.ub.tum.de/?id=1285570 Open Source Modelling and Optimisation of Energy Infrastructure at Urban Scale]; Johannes Dorfner; Dissertation, Technical University of Munich, 2016
* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/node?id=1171502 Electricity system optimization in the EUMENA region]; Matthias Huber, Johannes Dorfner, Thomas Hamacher; technical report, Munich, 2012
* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/doc/1233948/1233948.pdf Modelling a Low-Carbon Power System for Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore]; Juergen Stich, Melanie Mannhart, Thomas Zipperle, Tobias Massier, Matthias Huber, Thomas Hamacher; 33rd IEW International Energy Workshop, Peking, 2014
* [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.040 Transmission grid extensions for the integration of variable renewable energies in Europe: Who benefits where?]; Katrin Schaber, Florian Steinke, Thomas Hamacher; Energy Policy, Volume 43, April 2012, 123–135.
|Model input file format=No
|Model file format=No
|Model output file format=No
}}

Thermal demand

2016-08-24T13:26:19Z

Johannes Dorfner:

= Introduction =

Heating demand is broadly divided into low-temperature demand for space and water heating, and high-temperature demand for process heat in industry.

Time series of low-temperature heating demand can be approximated by the degree-day assumption, which assumes that heating demand increases linearly with temperature below some threshold (e.g. 15 degrees Celsius). This approximation neglects consumer behaviour (e.g. consumers may turn down their heating at night).

 

= Europe =

== Eurostat yearly energy consumption ==

[http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/energy/data/energy-balances http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/energy/data/energy-balances]

For years 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2008-2014

Covers energy usage in EU, Balkans, Norway, Ukraine, Turkey, but NOT Switzerland.

Distributed by sector (Industry, Transport, Residential, Services).

Q: Is it safe to assume that non-electric residential and service energy consumption is for low-T heating?

 

== Odyssee-Mure database yearly energy data for Europe ==

[http://www.odyssee-mure.eu/ http://www.odyssee-mure.eu/]

This distinguishes between water and space heating by sector (Residential/Tertiary/Industry), but is incomplete (missing countries and years).

 

== BMWi yearly energy statistics for Germany ==

[http://bmwi.de/DE/Themen/Energie/Energiedaten-und-analysen/Energiedaten/gesamtausgabe,did=476134.html BMWi energy statistics]

This distinguishes between water and space heating.

 

= USA =

* The dataset [http://en.openei.org/datasets/dataset/commercial-and-residential-hourly-load-profiles-for-all-tmy3-locations-in-the-united-states Commercial and Residential Hourly Load Profiles for all TMY3 Locations in the United States] on [http://en.openei.org/ OpenEI] contains hourly load profiles (for both electricity and heat) for synthetic reference buildings, modelled at over 1000 different locations (i.e. the TMY3 weather stations).

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Milano 2016

2016-08-07T09:49:34Z

Johannes Dorfner:

This is the wiki page for the upcoming '''Fifth Workshop of the [http://openmod-initiative.org/ Open Energy Modelling Initiative]''', a grass-root organization of modellers from various European research institutes and universities. After two workshops in Berlin, one in London and one in Stockholm, the next one will be in '''Milano, Italy hosted by [http://http://www.energia.polimi.it/english/index.php? [1]]'''.The workshop takes place on '''27-28 October, 2016'''. As always, there is no registration fee, so feel free to join! 

This wiki page will be updated frequently; with a program and practical information. All participants are invited to contribute suggestions of different sessions to be included in the program. And in the meantime, feel free to register on the [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative mailing list] where all things regarding energy modelling are discussed. 

== Background ==

Energy models are widely used for policy advice and research. They serve to answer questions on energy policy, decarbonization, and transitions towards renewable energy sources. Yet, most energy models are black boxes – even to fellow researchers. This is what we want to change. We are a group of modellers from various universities and research institutes who want to promote open energy modelling. We believe that Open Source models and Open Data will advance knowledge and lead to better energy policies. Our mission is to enable Open Source energy modelling by providing a platform for collaboration as well as tools along the full value chain of energy economics and energy system models. That is why we founded the Open Energy Modelling Initiative (openmod initiative) just a year ago. You are welcome to join us for our next workshop!
 

== Practical information ==

[[File:Polimi bovisa.jpg|left|400px|alt=Polimi bovisa.jpg]]

'''Venue:''' Politecnico di Milano – Department of Energy (Mi Bovisa branch)

'''Map:'''  [https://goo.gl/maps/NLt6c8wrEKz https://goo.gl/maps/NLt6c8wrEKz]

'''Dates''': 27-28 October, 2016

'''Begin:''' Thursday (27 October) 10.00 '''End:''' Friday (28 October) 16:00

'''Workshop location: '''All the sessions will take place at the Department of Energy – B25 building, in 3 different rooms at ground floor (1 for plenary sections, and 2 for breakout groups).

'''Fee:''' no registration fee, but you will need to cover your own food and lodging expenses.

'''Accommodation option: '''The Department of Energy is placed in the industrial zone of Milan, with very few hotels/pubs/restaurant and no discos. We suggest [http://hotellombardia.com/en/home Hotel Lombardia – Milano], near the centre of Milan, which has an agreement with Politecnico di Milano: 1 single room + breakfast = 85€ per night (when booking you must specify that you are participating at an event at Politecnico).

'''Transport: '''The department is well connected with public transportation. Here you find all the information for reaching the Department and other useful information for enjoying Milan:  

*[[:File:Reaching MILANO BOVISA POLITECNICO.pdf|Reaching MILANO BOVISA POLITECNICO (PDF)]] 
*[[:File:Public transport map Milan.pdf|Milano public transport map (PDF)]] 
*[http://www.turismo.milano.it/wps/portal/tur/en Tourism information (English) on milano.it]

 

[[File:Logo unesco chair.jpg|left|300px|RTENOTITLE]]The workshop is hosted by the [http://www.unescochair-e4sd.polimi.it/ UNESCO Chair in Energy for Sustainable Development]. 

 

 

 

 

== Registration ==

xxx

== Participants ==

xxx

== Proposed Programme ==

YYY

== Break-out-groups ==

zzz

== Short talks and presentations ==

XYZ

== Tech talks ==

ZYX

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Stockholm 2016

2016-05-01T12:28:07Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Session 2 */

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Stockholm 2016

2016-05-01T12:25:52Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Break-out-groups */

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Stockholm 2016

2016-04-29T13:49:46Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Break-out-groups */

This is the wiki page for the upcoming '''Fourth Workshop of the [http://openmod-initiative.org/ Open Energy Modelling Initiative]''', a grass-root organization of modellers from various European research institutes and universities. After two workshops in Berlin and one in London, the next one will be in '''Stockholm, Sweden hosted by [http://www.kth.se/en/itm/inst/energiteknik/forskning/desa/welcome-to-the-unit-of-energy-systems-analysis-kth-desa-1.197296/ KTH]'''.The workshop takes place on '''28-29 April, 2016'''. As always, there is no registration fee, so feel free to join! 

This wiki page will be updated frequently; with a program and practical information. All participants are invited to contribute suggestions of different sessions to be included in the program. And in the meantime, feel free to register on the [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative mailing list] where all things regarding energy modelling are discussed.

 

 

== Background ==

Energy models are widely used for policy advice and research. They serve to answer questions on energy policy, decarbonization, and transitions towards renewable energy sources. Yet, most energy models are black boxes – even to fellow researchers. This is what we want to change. We are a group of modellers from various universities and research institutes who want to promote open energy modelling. We believe that Open Source models and Open Data will advance knowledge and lead to better energy policies. Our mission is to enable Open Source energy modelling by providing a platform for collaboration as well as tools along the full value chain of energy economics and energy system models. That is why we founded the Open Energy Modelling Initiative (openmod initiative) just a year ago. You are welcome to join us for our next workshop!

 

 

 

== Practical information ==

[[File:KTH campus.JPG|left|300px|alt=KTH campus.JPG]] 

Venue: KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm  Map: [https://goo.gl/maps/rrmJwDPzS382 https://goo.gl/maps/rrmJwDPzS382] 

Dates: 28-29 April, 2016

Begin: Thursday (28 April) 10.00 End: Friday (29 April) 16:00

Day 1 (Thursday, 28/04) will be in [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 room M311, Brinellvägen 68] and Day 2 (Friday, 29/04) will be in [https://goo.gl/maps/tLxHaKn55p42 ‘Salongen’, KTH Library] 

[https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative Join our mailing list] to receive updates. Fee: no registration fee, but you will need to cover your own food and lodging expenses.

Accommodation option: [http://www.booking.com/hotel/se/elite-arcadia.en-gb.html?aid=311984;label=elite-arcadia-FxM5qzBbBwoKMW*sBkmKgAS72034809313:pl:ta:p1:p2:ac:ap1t2:neg:fi:tiaud-146342138470:kwd-9075294584:lp9062457:li:dec:dm;sid=32462409aa91f156f9d0002661f704d5;dcid=4;dist=0;room1=A,A;sb_price_type=total;srfid=6b6ac29d58c3ce5838fec633122e0413c52c78e5X1;type=total;ucfs=1& Elite Hotel Arcadia] is the closest hotel to the venue.

 

[[File:DESA logo.png|left|300px|alt=DESA logo.png]] 

The workshop is hosted by the [http://www.kth.se/en/itm/inst/energiteknik/forskning/desa/welcome-to-the-unit-of-energy-systems-analysis-kth-desa-1.197296/ Unit of Energy Systems Analysis, KTH].

Live streaming of the workshop is available [https://connect.sunet.se/r1mudmbgzt2/ here]!

 

 

== Registration ==

'''We've now reached the upper size limit of the rooms booked for the workshop (50 people), so registration is closed!''' If addition space becomes available, we will re-open the registration.

 All the information that you entered in the form is visible on the [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12PuGA4PhUP5oJgPDT7SfIHxU4VIJDvh-JI4wtFjwyvQ/ participant list], apart from your email address which is kept private.

If you run into any problems with the registration, drop an email to Tom Brown (brown at fias.uni-frankfurt.de).

If you would like to give a 4-minute talk, please edit the list of talks below (you have to create an account on the wiki and log in first - see the buttons at the top right of this page).

 

== Participants ==

Everyone who has registered is visible on the [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12PuGA4PhUP5oJgPDT7SfIHxU4VIJDvh-JI4wtFjwyvQ/ participant list].

== Proposed Programme ==

'''Thursday morning (Venue: [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 M311, Brinellvägen 68])'''

''10.00                   Start''

10.00 – 10.05      Welcome and important information (Abhi)

10.05 – 10.15      What is open-mod (Stefan)

10.15 – 10.45      Introduction (everyone)

10.45 – 11.30      Short talks and presentations (1-8) (plenary)

''11:30 – 11:45      Coffee break''

11.45 – 12.30      Short talks and presentations (9-17) (plenary)

''12.30 – 13.30      Lunch'' 

  

'''Thursday afternoon (Venue: [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 M311, Brinellvägen 68])'''

13.30 – 13.45      Introducing break-out groups (plenary) 

13.45 – 15.00      Break-out groups 1 (parallel)

15.00 – 15.30      Reporting back (plenary)

''15.30 – 15.45      Coffee break''

15.45 – 16.00      Introducing break-out groups (plenary)

16.00 – 17.15      Break-out groups 2 (parallel)

17.15 – 17.30      Reporting back (plenary)

''18.00                   End of day''

''19.30                    Dinner at [https://goo.gl/maps/1ErWcB3Xy9U2 Restaurang Cypern]''

 

'''Friday morning (Venue: [https://goo.gl/maps/AgP2c9WmWz82 'Salongen', KTH Library])'''

''10.00                    Start''

10.00  – 10.15      Summary of first day

10.15  – 10.30      Introducing break-out groups

''10.30'' – ''10.45       Coffee break'' 

10.45 – 12.00       Break-out groups 3 (parallel)

12.00 – 12.30       Reporting back (plenary)

''12.30 – 13.30       Lunch'' 

  

'''Friday afternoon (Venue: [https://goo.gl/maps/AgP2c9WmWz82 'Salongen', KTH Library])'''

13.30 – 14.30       TechTalks or other discussion 

14.30 – 15.30       Wrap up, next workshop

''16.00                    End of workshop''

 

 

 

== Break-out-groups ==

A break-out-group is a workshop-like gathering of interested individuals for a timespan of 2-3 hours to actively discuss a common topic. All groups feature 1-2 organisers whose responsibility is to moderate the discussion and capture any results in written form (preferably in a shared Google Document [for easier simultaneous editing of all participants]).

The Third Workshop featured a total 22 break-out groups, which were considered too numerous in hindsight. At the same time, the breadth of covered topics. This section is the attempt to bundle similar break-out-group topics under more general labels to reduce the number of groups, while keeping their total scope as broad as possible.

=== Proposed Break-out Groups by Session ===

{| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" style="width: 100%"
|-
| Session 
| Theme 
| Topics 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="6" | 1 
|
Data 

collecting data

 

|
- general collecting data sources for the wiki, improving the [[Data|data wiki]] and [[Data requirements for a European energy system model|Data requirements for a European energy system model]] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dQMBTKkZxB4pkG4qP6pVk2AU5U6rgJrcxJJbYDQLaP8/edit data collection google doc]

- data quality assurance

- [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JvS1HnJxlV9oZitUkoLIZm4Ar2fo3gBHckNveks5WiU/edit?usp=sharing Power Grid Data]

- Power plant data [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-983-sapx66olJNcvucsFT70hi_ZE4lrmVqZIf9dhrU/edit Power Plant Data google doc]

- Weather and climate data:
<ul style="margin-left: 40px;">
<li>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_JF-PMAudL3xyWOI4NmfQM36zFl_VWjqnQEg24UGD_s/edit?usp=sharing Google doc notes]</li>
<li>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/188I99Euu1fQU_yplThq-mpjhBEhK-7cU6U5dA6IShpY/edit?usp=sharing Google doc notes from London 2015 workshop]</li>
</ul>

|-
|
Water/Energy model coupling

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WK-CFJSfs3oVavqxMO6W6HqQ_TdcdYuSODDDqJB9Zfs/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
|
Coding beyond Pyomo

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPJ8ZbKO7n8egc0Xhsb2wmVQsprTZ04OZmYy05qkwaY/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
|
Data 

data structure organisation on the openmod site 

|
- discussing the concept of a CKAN DB on the openmod-site 

- data storage 

- integrating data with the openmod website 

|-
| Modelling 
|
- incorporating geospatial data into models 

- <span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e28-d3a8-9ab6-7f67b5a13431">spatial and temporal weather data interpolation

|-
| Misc. 
| Publishing 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" |
| from talks
| 1) GIS Analyses for urban concepts;
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="5" | 2 
| [[:File:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yOFHokAGpWqY4WXZojncoJFSLAvUu2y5tuhivUILj98/edit?usp=sharing|Data management]] 
|
- data management best practices 

(continuing discussion - data quality assurance)

|-
|
Data matching / Harmonization

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mH7jiVTXMF-xF2BrR88BUEK3bjKhGsafEu-Mdxubv4M/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
| Modelling 
|
- techniques for <span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e29-706c-d3c5-62b091c94674">flow based market coupling<span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline">, [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p_5A8aJhL5Q43DhZJp1Ut9lt8QgernsdUW9luMX5tGg/edit?usp=sharing electricity network modelling] 

- top-down modeling approach of electricity demand

|-
|
 

|
|-
| Misc. 
| Licensing 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="3" | 3 
| NN (free for further discussions) 
|
<span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e2b-6bcd-8aba-71eb0c1a427a"> 

|-
| Modelling 
|
- modeling workflows (Pyomo, Pandas, R, GAMS) 

- modeling best practices

- [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b-mdmP29hoCY1DyvBrVWV2VJrbobx0DFZLv7MkvRC2E/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
| [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mnPBwYTpsgNvU91MziFJ6KBvebTlug6mXFaBbJO3ULo/edit Outreach] 
|
 - objectives, target groups 

 - openmod online presence/platform

 - conferences, publications (which journals??)

 - projects

- interface between research and public

        - questions of data manipulation etc.

|}

 

 

 

 

 

=== Finding topics for break-out-groups ===

This table is an attempt to map the [[Open Energy Modelling Workshop - London 2015|Break-out-groups from the Third Workshop]] to a smaller number of covered topics.

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="1" frame="hsides" rules="rows"
|-
! colspan="2" rowspan="1" scope="col" | Third Workshop break-out-group name
! scope="col" | Covered topic(s)
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 1
| Open weather data
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 2
| Renewables.ninja
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 3
| Use of models in government and industry
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 4
| Model Factsheets
| Visibility
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 5
| Open model testing
| Coding
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 6
| Demand side and storage
| Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 7
| Wind potentials
| Open Data, Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 8
| Hydro electricity
| Open Data, Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 9
| The Open Power System Data platform
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 10
| Pros and cons of Open Source modelling
| Licensing, Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 11
| Energy modeling for beginners
| Coding, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 12
| OpenEnergy platform
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 13
| Open Access publishing in energy modelling
| Outreach, Publishing
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 14
| Openmod article
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 15
| Conference
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 16
| Funders best practice list
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 17
| Data sources hackathon
| Open Data, Coding
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 18
| Openmod website
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 19
| Which license fits my model?
| Licensing
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 20
| Consultation “Marktstammdatenregister” BNetzA
| Open Data, Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 21
| Load-flow modelling / grids
| Modelling, Tech
|-
| 22
| Python/Pyomo user group
| Coding, Modelling
|}

 

 

 

=== Proposed break-out-groups ===

With the previous mapping at hand, one could therefore propose the following topics. ''This list is open to discussion!''

#'''Open Data '''Most probable candidate for splitting in 2-3 different groups: covers data publishing (where and how), data acquisition (from where and how) and possibly data processing
#'''Modelling'''    (Mathematical) modelling techniques, algorithms, basically all conceptual work that is independent from the actual implementation (cf. '''Coding''').
#'''Tech'''    similar to '''Modelling''', but more focused on the specifics of specific technologies like fluctuating renewables, power grid, power plants (generators, turbines, ...). Probable candidate for splitting, if many participants with divergent interests come together
#'''Coding     '''software frameworks for modelling, data processing, optimisation, data visualisation; ask for tips, share tricks, present possibly helpful new stuff; possible split: introductory "course"-style group and a more advanced "sharing of experience"-style group
#'''Publishing'''    is about (Open Access|Traditional|Other) methods of publishing one's research
#'''Licensing'''    as about license questions for choosing the "right" license for one's own published works or for how to comply with the licenses of others' works. Possible overlap with '''Open Data'''
#'''Outreach'''    is about increasing awareness for open (energy) modelling community with Openmod as a common banner. This includes discussing the common mid- and long-term goals, presenting the current progress
#'''Visibility'''    is about increasing the reach of one's individual/institute's reach through various means. Possible overlap with '''Publishing'''

This list is of course open to discussion and change! '''Be bold''' and edit, suggest and edit on the talk page or the Openmod mailing list (currently the organisation of the break-out-groups is done on the [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qVM-eJBn9aYTW8ectX2hZ0QC3WesyInrtvWoMFRkiW4/edit# Break-out group Google Doc]). In the end, the existence of a break-out-groups lives and dies with people interested in discussing the proposed topics.

== Short talks and presentations ==

Please list your name and a proposed title of a specific topic or research activity that you would like to present (4 minutes talk, 1 minutes Q&A, maximum 3 ppt slides) 

#PyPSA: Network modelling with free software (Tom Brown)
#Using causal network analysis to measure electricity market synchronisation (Giorgio Castagneto-Gissey)
#Ensemble forecasting in district heating (Magnus Dahl)
#Urban energy systems modelling & the HUES platform (Andrew Bollinger)
#Concept of expanding the openmod online presence (introduction to the breakout group (outreach)) (Eva Wiechers/Martin Glauer) 
#open_eGo: Electricty Grid Optimization. GIS-Analyses for demand and generation data (Ludwig Schneider) 
#Using Open GIS-data and Models for Spatio-temporal Analysis of Urban Energy Systems (Alaa Alhamwi)
#ONSSET: A GIS based electrification planning tool using open datasets (Alexandros Korkovelos) 
#An open model management infrastrucuture: MoManI (Yousef Almulla)
#Model based analysis of policy measures and transformation pathways to a sustainable energy system in europe (Francesco Gardumi)
#state of open energy modelling framework (oemof) (Berit Müller)
#Opening Energy Modeling to unconventional participants, the early-stage case of MELiSsa (Fabrizio Fattori) 
#Building an open database of power plants (Johannes Friedrich)
#A very brief update on two projects: Open Power System Data (OPSD) and Renewables.ninja (Stefan Pfenninger)
#mosaik: A flexible smart grid co-simulation framework (Jan Sören Schwarz)
#Current Model Development and Data Management at IIASA (Matthew Gidden)
#Renewable energy potential considering theroretical, legal, technical and economic constraints (Pietro Zambelli)

== Tech talks ==

# [http://ojdo.de/openmod/160429-toy-models.pdf Toy optimisation models in three modelling languages] (Johannes Dorfner)
# Flow-based market clearing (FBMC)

 [[Events|Back to events overview]]

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Stockholm 2016

2016-04-29T13:48:54Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Participants */

This is the wiki page for the upcoming '''Fourth Workshop of the [http://openmod-initiative.org/ Open Energy Modelling Initiative]''', a grass-root organization of modellers from various European research institutes and universities. After two workshops in Berlin and one in London, the next one will be in '''Stockholm, Sweden hosted by [http://www.kth.se/en/itm/inst/energiteknik/forskning/desa/welcome-to-the-unit-of-energy-systems-analysis-kth-desa-1.197296/ KTH]'''.The workshop takes place on '''28-29 April, 2016'''. As always, there is no registration fee, so feel free to join! 

This wiki page will be updated frequently; with a program and practical information. All participants are invited to contribute suggestions of different sessions to be included in the program. And in the meantime, feel free to register on the [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative mailing list] where all things regarding energy modelling are discussed.

 

 

== Background ==

Energy models are widely used for policy advice and research. They serve to answer questions on energy policy, decarbonization, and transitions towards renewable energy sources. Yet, most energy models are black boxes – even to fellow researchers. This is what we want to change. We are a group of modellers from various universities and research institutes who want to promote open energy modelling. We believe that Open Source models and Open Data will advance knowledge and lead to better energy policies. Our mission is to enable Open Source energy modelling by providing a platform for collaboration as well as tools along the full value chain of energy economics and energy system models. That is why we founded the Open Energy Modelling Initiative (openmod initiative) just a year ago. You are welcome to join us for our next workshop!

 

 

 

== Practical information ==

[[File:KTH campus.JPG|left|300px|alt=KTH campus.JPG]] 

Venue: KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm  Map: [https://goo.gl/maps/rrmJwDPzS382 https://goo.gl/maps/rrmJwDPzS382] 

Dates: 28-29 April, 2016

Begin: Thursday (28 April) 10.00 End: Friday (29 April) 16:00

Day 1 (Thursday, 28/04) will be in [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 room M311, Brinellvägen 68] and Day 2 (Friday, 29/04) will be in [https://goo.gl/maps/tLxHaKn55p42 ‘Salongen’, KTH Library] 

[https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative Join our mailing list] to receive updates. Fee: no registration fee, but you will need to cover your own food and lodging expenses.

Accommodation option: [http://www.booking.com/hotel/se/elite-arcadia.en-gb.html?aid=311984;label=elite-arcadia-FxM5qzBbBwoKMW*sBkmKgAS72034809313:pl:ta:p1:p2:ac:ap1t2:neg:fi:tiaud-146342138470:kwd-9075294584:lp9062457:li:dec:dm;sid=32462409aa91f156f9d0002661f704d5;dcid=4;dist=0;room1=A,A;sb_price_type=total;srfid=6b6ac29d58c3ce5838fec633122e0413c52c78e5X1;type=total;ucfs=1& Elite Hotel Arcadia] is the closest hotel to the venue.

 

[[File:DESA logo.png|left|300px|alt=DESA logo.png]] 

The workshop is hosted by the [http://www.kth.se/en/itm/inst/energiteknik/forskning/desa/welcome-to-the-unit-of-energy-systems-analysis-kth-desa-1.197296/ Unit of Energy Systems Analysis, KTH].

Live streaming of the workshop is available [https://connect.sunet.se/r1mudmbgzt2/ here]!

 

 

== Registration ==

'''We've now reached the upper size limit of the rooms booked for the workshop (50 people), so registration is closed!''' If addition space becomes available, we will re-open the registration.

 All the information that you entered in the form is visible on the [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12PuGA4PhUP5oJgPDT7SfIHxU4VIJDvh-JI4wtFjwyvQ/ participant list], apart from your email address which is kept private.

If you run into any problems with the registration, drop an email to Tom Brown (brown at fias.uni-frankfurt.de).

If you would like to give a 4-minute talk, please edit the list of talks below (you have to create an account on the wiki and log in first - see the buttons at the top right of this page).

 

== Participants ==

Everyone who has registered is visible on the [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12PuGA4PhUP5oJgPDT7SfIHxU4VIJDvh-JI4wtFjwyvQ/ participant list].

== Proposed Programme ==

'''Thursday morning (Venue: [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 M311, Brinellvägen 68])'''

''10.00                   Start''

10.00 – 10.05      Welcome and important information (Abhi)

10.05 – 10.15      What is open-mod (Stefan)

10.15 – 10.45      Introduction (everyone)

10.45 – 11.30      Short talks and presentations (1-8) (plenary)

''11:30 – 11:45      Coffee break''

11.45 – 12.30      Short talks and presentations (9-17) (plenary)

''12.30 – 13.30      Lunch'' 

  

'''Thursday afternoon (Venue: [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 M311, Brinellvägen 68])'''

13.30 – 13.45      Introducing break-out groups (plenary) 

13.45 – 15.00      Break-out groups 1 (parallel)

15.00 – 15.30      Reporting back (plenary)

''15.30 – 15.45      Coffee break''

15.45 – 16.00      Introducing break-out groups (plenary)

16.00 – 17.15      Break-out groups 2 (parallel)

17.15 – 17.30      Reporting back (plenary)

''18.00                   End of day''

''19.30                    Dinner at [https://goo.gl/maps/1ErWcB3Xy9U2 Restaurang Cypern]''

 

'''Friday morning (Venue: [https://goo.gl/maps/AgP2c9WmWz82 'Salongen', KTH Library])'''

''10.00                    Start''

10.00  – 10.15      Summary of first day

10.15  – 10.30      Introducing break-out groups

''10.30'' – ''10.45       Coffee break'' 

10.45 – 12.00       Break-out groups 3 (parallel)

12.00 – 12.30       Reporting back (plenary)

''12.30 – 13.30       Lunch'' 

  

'''Friday afternoon (Venue: [https://goo.gl/maps/AgP2c9WmWz82 'Salongen', KTH Library])'''

13.30 – 14.30       TechTalks or other discussion 

14.30 – 15.30       Wrap up, next workshop

''16.00                    End of workshop''

 

 

 

== Break-out-groups ==

A break-out-group is a workshop-like gathering of interested individuals for a timespan of 2-3 hours to actively discuss a common topic. All groups feature 1-2 organisers whose responsibility is to moderate the discussion and capture any results in written form (preferably in a shared Google Document [for easier simultaneous editing of all participants]).

The Third Workshop featured a total 22 break-out groups, which were considered too numerous in hindsight. At the same time, the breadth of covered topics. This section is the attempt to bundle similar break-out-group topics under more general labels to reduce the number of groups, while keeping their total scope as broad as possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

=== Proposed Break-out Groups by Session ===

{| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" style="width: 100%"
|-
| Session 
| Theme 
| Topics 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="6" | 1 
|
Data 

collecting data

 

|
- general collecting data sources for the wiki, improving the [[Data|data wiki]] and [[Data requirements for a European energy system model|Data requirements for a European energy system model]] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dQMBTKkZxB4pkG4qP6pVk2AU5U6rgJrcxJJbYDQLaP8/edit data collection google doc]

- data quality assurance

- [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JvS1HnJxlV9oZitUkoLIZm4Ar2fo3gBHckNveks5WiU/edit?usp=sharing Power Grid Data]

- Power plant data [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-983-sapx66olJNcvucsFT70hi_ZE4lrmVqZIf9dhrU/edit Power Plant Data google doc]

- Weather and climate data:
<ul style="margin-left: 40px;">
<li>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_JF-PMAudL3xyWOI4NmfQM36zFl_VWjqnQEg24UGD_s/edit?usp=sharing Google doc notes]</li>
<li>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/188I99Euu1fQU_yplThq-mpjhBEhK-7cU6U5dA6IShpY/edit?usp=sharing Google doc notes from London 2015 workshop]</li>
</ul>

|-
|
Water/Energy model coupling

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WK-CFJSfs3oVavqxMO6W6HqQ_TdcdYuSODDDqJB9Zfs/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
|
Coding beyond Pyomo

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPJ8ZbKO7n8egc0Xhsb2wmVQsprTZ04OZmYy05qkwaY/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
|
Data 

data structure organisation on the openmod site 

|
- discussing the concept of a CKAN DB on the openmod-site 

- data storage 

- integrating data with the openmod website 

|-
| Modelling 
|
- incorporating geospatial data into models 

- <span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e28-d3a8-9ab6-7f67b5a13431">spatial and temporal weather data interpolation

|-
| Misc. 
| Publishing 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" |
| from talks
| 1) GIS Analyses for urban concepts;
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="5" | 2 
| [[:File:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yOFHokAGpWqY4WXZojncoJFSLAvUu2y5tuhivUILj98/edit?usp=sharing|Data management]] 
|
- data management best practices 

(continuing discussion - data quality assurance)

|-
|
Data matching / Harmonization

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mH7jiVTXMF-xF2BrR88BUEK3bjKhGsafEu-Mdxubv4M/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
| Modelling 
|
- techniques for <span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e29-706c-d3c5-62b091c94674">flow based market coupling<span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline">, [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p_5A8aJhL5Q43DhZJp1Ut9lt8QgernsdUW9luMX5tGg/edit?usp=sharing electricity network modelling] 

- top-down modeling approach of electricity demand

|-
|
 

|
|-
| Misc. 
| Licensing 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="3" | 3 
| NN (free for further discussions) 
|
<span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e2b-6bcd-8aba-71eb0c1a427a"> 

|-
| Modelling 
|
- modeling workflows (Pyomo, Pandas, R, GAMS) 

- modeling best practices

- [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b-mdmP29hoCY1DyvBrVWV2VJrbobx0DFZLv7MkvRC2E/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
| [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mnPBwYTpsgNvU91MziFJ6KBvebTlug6mXFaBbJO3ULo/edit Outreach] 
|
 - objectives, target groups 

 - openmod online presence/platform

 - conferences, publications (which journals??)

 - projects

- interface between research and public

        - questions of data manipulation etc.

|}

 

 

 

 

 

=== Finding topics for break-out-groups ===

This table is an attempt to map the [[Open Energy Modelling Workshop - London 2015|Break-out-groups from the Third Workshop]] to a smaller number of covered topics.

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="1" frame="hsides" rules="rows"
|-
! colspan="2" rowspan="1" scope="col" | Third Workshop break-out-group name
! scope="col" | Covered topic(s)
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 1
| Open weather data
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 2
| Renewables.ninja
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 3
| Use of models in government and industry
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 4
| Model Factsheets
| Visibility
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 5
| Open model testing
| Coding
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 6
| Demand side and storage
| Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 7
| Wind potentials
| Open Data, Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 8
| Hydro electricity
| Open Data, Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 9
| The Open Power System Data platform
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 10
| Pros and cons of Open Source modelling
| Licensing, Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 11
| Energy modeling for beginners
| Coding, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 12
| OpenEnergy platform
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 13
| Open Access publishing in energy modelling
| Outreach, Publishing
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 14
| Openmod article
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 15
| Conference
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 16
| Funders best practice list
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 17
| Data sources hackathon
| Open Data, Coding
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 18
| Openmod website
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 19
| Which license fits my model?
| Licensing
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 20
| Consultation “Marktstammdatenregister” BNetzA
| Open Data, Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 21
| Load-flow modelling / grids
| Modelling, Tech
|-
| 22
| Python/Pyomo user group
| Coding, Modelling
|}

 

 

 

=== Proposed break-out-groups ===

With the previous mapping at hand, one could therefore propose the following topics. ''This list is open to discussion!''

#'''Open Data '''Most probable candidate for splitting in 2-3 different groups: covers data publishing (where and how), data acquisition (from where and how) and possibly data processing
#'''Modelling'''    (Mathematical) modelling techniques, algorithms, basically all conceptual work that is independent from the actual implementation (cf. '''Coding''').
#'''Tech'''    similar to '''Modelling''', but more focused on the specifics of specific technologies like fluctuating renewables, power grid, power plants (generators, turbines, ...). Probable candidate for splitting, if many participants with divergent interests come together
#'''Coding     '''software frameworks for modelling, data processing, optimisation, data visualisation; ask for tips, share tricks, present possibly helpful new stuff; possible split: introductory "course"-style group and a more advanced "sharing of experience"-style group
#'''Publishing'''    is about (Open Access|Traditional|Other) methods of publishing one's research
#'''Licensing'''    as about license questions for choosing the "right" license for one's own published works or for how to comply with the licenses of others' works. Possible overlap with '''Open Data'''
#'''Outreach'''    is about increasing awareness for open (energy) modelling community with Openmod as a common banner. This includes discussing the common mid- and long-term goals, presenting the current progress
#'''Visibility'''    is about increasing the reach of one's individual/institute's reach through various means. Possible overlap with '''Publishing'''

This list is of course open to discussion and change! '''Be bold''' and edit, suggest and edit on the talk page or the Openmod mailing list (currently the organisation of the break-out-groups is done on the [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qVM-eJBn9aYTW8ectX2hZ0QC3WesyInrtvWoMFRkiW4/edit# Break-out group Google Doc]). In the end, the existence of a break-out-groups lives and dies with people interested in discussing the proposed topics.

== Short talks and presentations ==

Please list your name and a proposed title of a specific topic or research activity that you would like to present (4 minutes talk, 1 minutes Q&A, maximum 3 ppt slides) 

#PyPSA: Network modelling with free software (Tom Brown)
#Using causal network analysis to measure electricity market synchronisation (Giorgio Castagneto-Gissey)
#Ensemble forecasting in district heating (Magnus Dahl)
#Urban energy systems modelling & the HUES platform (Andrew Bollinger)
#Concept of expanding the openmod online presence (introduction to the breakout group (outreach)) (Eva Wiechers/Martin Glauer) 
#open_eGo: Electricty Grid Optimization. GIS-Analyses for demand and generation data (Ludwig Schneider) 
#Using Open GIS-data and Models for Spatio-temporal Analysis of Urban Energy Systems (Alaa Alhamwi)
#ONSSET: A GIS based electrification planning tool using open datasets (Alexandros Korkovelos) 
#An open model management infrastrucuture: MoManI (Yousef Almulla)
#Model based analysis of policy measures and transformation pathways to a sustainable energy system in europe (Francesco Gardumi)
#state of open energy modelling framework (oemof) (Berit Müller)
#Opening Energy Modeling to unconventional participants, the early-stage case of MELiSsa (Fabrizio Fattori) 
#Building an open database of power plants (Johannes Friedrich)
#A very brief update on two projects: Open Power System Data (OPSD) and Renewables.ninja (Stefan Pfenninger)
#mosaik: A flexible smart grid co-simulation framework (Jan Sören Schwarz)
#Current Model Development and Data Management at IIASA (Matthew Gidden)
#Renewable energy potential considering theroretical, legal, technical and economic constraints (Pietro Zambelli)

== Tech talks ==

# [http://ojdo.de/openmod/160429-toy-models.pdf Toy optimisation models in three modelling languages] (Johannes Dorfner)
# Flow-based market clearing (FBMC)

 [[Events|Back to events overview]]

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Stockholm 2016

2016-04-29T13:14:31Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Proposed break-out-groups */

This is the wiki page for the upcoming '''Fourth Workshop of the [http://openmod-initiative.org/ Open Energy Modelling Initiative]''', a grass-root organization of modellers from various European research institutes and universities. After two workshops in Berlin and one in London, the next one will be in '''Stockholm, Sweden hosted by [http://www.kth.se/en/itm/inst/energiteknik/forskning/desa/welcome-to-the-unit-of-energy-systems-analysis-kth-desa-1.197296/ KTH]'''.The workshop takes place on '''28-29 April, 2016'''. As always, there is no registration fee, so feel free to join! 

This wiki page will be updated frequently; with a program and practical information. All participants are invited to contribute suggestions of different sessions to be included in the program. And in the meantime, feel free to register on the [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative mailing list] where all things regarding energy modelling are discussed.

 

 

== Background ==

Energy models are widely used for policy advice and research. They serve to answer questions on energy policy, decarbonization, and transitions towards renewable energy sources. Yet, most energy models are black boxes – even to fellow researchers. This is what we want to change. We are a group of modellers from various universities and research institutes who want to promote open energy modelling. We believe that Open Source models and Open Data will advance knowledge and lead to better energy policies. Our mission is to enable Open Source energy modelling by providing a platform for collaboration as well as tools along the full value chain of energy economics and energy system models. That is why we founded the Open Energy Modelling Initiative (openmod initiative) just a year ago. You are welcome to join us for our next workshop!

 

 

 

== Practical information ==

[[File:KTH campus.JPG|left|300px|alt=KTH campus.JPG]] 

Venue: KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm  Map: [https://goo.gl/maps/rrmJwDPzS382 https://goo.gl/maps/rrmJwDPzS382] 

Dates: 28-29 April, 2016

Begin: Thursday (28 April) 10.00 End: Friday (29 April) 16:00

Day 1 (Thursday, 28/04) will be in [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 room M311, Brinellvägen 68] and Day 2 (Friday, 29/04) will be in [https://goo.gl/maps/tLxHaKn55p42 ‘Salongen’, KTH Library] 

[https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative Join our mailing list] to receive updates. Fee: no registration fee, but you will need to cover your own food and lodging expenses.

Accommodation option: [http://www.booking.com/hotel/se/elite-arcadia.en-gb.html?aid=311984;label=elite-arcadia-FxM5qzBbBwoKMW*sBkmKgAS72034809313:pl:ta:p1:p2:ac:ap1t2:neg:fi:tiaud-146342138470:kwd-9075294584:lp9062457:li:dec:dm;sid=32462409aa91f156f9d0002661f704d5;dcid=4;dist=0;room1=A,A;sb_price_type=total;srfid=6b6ac29d58c3ce5838fec633122e0413c52c78e5X1;type=total;ucfs=1& Elite Hotel Arcadia] is the closest hotel to the venue.

 

[[File:DESA logo.png|left|300px|alt=DESA logo.png]] 

The workshop is hosted by the [http://www.kth.se/en/itm/inst/energiteknik/forskning/desa/welcome-to-the-unit-of-energy-systems-analysis-kth-desa-1.197296/ Unit of Energy Systems Analysis, KTH].

Live streaming of the workshop is available [https://connect.sunet.se/r1mudmbgzt2/ here]!

 

 

== Registration ==

'''We've now reached the upper size limit of the rooms booked for the workshop (50 people), so registration is closed!''' If addition space becomes available, we will re-open the registration.

 All the information that you entered in the form is visible on the [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12PuGA4PhUP5oJgPDT7SfIHxU4VIJDvh-JI4wtFjwyvQ/ participant list], apart from your email address which is kept private.

If you run into any problems with the registration, drop an email to Tom Brown (brown at fias.uni-frankfurt.de).

If you would like to give a 4-minute talk, please edit the list of talks below (you have to create an account on the wiki and log in first - see the buttons at the top right of this page).

 

== Participants ==

Everyone who has registered is visible on the [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12PuGA4PhUP5oJgPDT7SfIHxU4VIJDvh-JI4wtFjwyvQ/ participant list].

 

 

 

 

 

== Proposed Programme ==

'''Thursday morning (Venue: [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 M311, Brinellvägen 68])'''

''10.00                   Start''

10.00 – 10.05      Welcome and important information (Abhi)

10.05 – 10.15      What is open-mod (Stefan)

10.15 – 10.45      Introduction (everyone)

10.45 – 11.30      Short talks and presentations (1-8) (plenary)

''11:30 – 11:45      Coffee break''

11.45 – 12.30      Short talks and presentations (9-17) (plenary)

''12.30 – 13.30      Lunch'' 

  

'''Thursday afternoon (Venue: [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 M311, Brinellvägen 68])'''

13.30 – 13.45      Introducing break-out groups (plenary) 

13.45 – 15.00      Break-out groups 1 (parallel)

15.00 – 15.30      Reporting back (plenary)

''15.30 – 15.45      Coffee break''

15.45 – 16.00      Introducing break-out groups (plenary)

16.00 – 17.15      Break-out groups 2 (parallel)

17.15 – 17.30      Reporting back (plenary)

''18.00                   End of day''

''19.30                    Dinner at [https://goo.gl/maps/1ErWcB3Xy9U2 Restaurang Cypern]''

 

'''Friday morning (Venue: [https://goo.gl/maps/AgP2c9WmWz82 'Salongen', KTH Library])'''

''10.00                    Start''

10.00  – 10.15      Summary of first day

10.15  – 10.30      Introducing break-out groups

''10.30'' – ''10.45       Coffee break'' 

10.45 – 12.00       Break-out groups 3 (parallel)

12.00 – 12.30       Reporting back (plenary)

''12.30 – 13.30       Lunch'' 

  

'''Friday afternoon (Venue: [https://goo.gl/maps/AgP2c9WmWz82 'Salongen', KTH Library])'''

13.30 – 14.30       TechTalks or other discussion 

14.30 – 15.30       Wrap up, next workshop

''16.00                    End of workshop''

 

 

 

== Break-out-groups ==

A break-out-group is a workshop-like gathering of interested individuals for a timespan of 2-3 hours to actively discuss a common topic. All groups feature 1-2 organisers whose responsibility is to moderate the discussion and capture any results in written form (preferably in a shared Google Document [for easier simultaneous editing of all participants]).

The Third Workshop featured a total 22 break-out groups, which were considered too numerous in hindsight. At the same time, the breadth of covered topics. This section is the attempt to bundle similar break-out-group topics under more general labels to reduce the number of groups, while keeping their total scope as broad as possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

=== Proposed Break-out Groups by Session ===

{| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" style="width: 100%"
|-
| Session 
| Theme 
| Topics 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="6" | 1 
|
Data 

collecting data

 

|
- general collecting data sources for the wiki, improving the [[Data|data wiki]] and [[Data requirements for a European energy system model|Data requirements for a European energy system model]] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dQMBTKkZxB4pkG4qP6pVk2AU5U6rgJrcxJJbYDQLaP8/edit data collection google doc]

- data quality assurance

- [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JvS1HnJxlV9oZitUkoLIZm4Ar2fo3gBHckNveks5WiU/edit?usp=sharing Power Grid Data]

- Power plant data [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-983-sapx66olJNcvucsFT70hi_ZE4lrmVqZIf9dhrU/edit Power Plant Data google doc]

- Weather and climate data:
<ul style="margin-left: 40px;">
<li>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_JF-PMAudL3xyWOI4NmfQM36zFl_VWjqnQEg24UGD_s/edit?usp=sharing Google doc notes]</li>
<li>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/188I99Euu1fQU_yplThq-mpjhBEhK-7cU6U5dA6IShpY/edit?usp=sharing Google doc notes from London 2015 workshop]</li>
</ul>

|-
|
Water/Energy model coupling

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WK-CFJSfs3oVavqxMO6W6HqQ_TdcdYuSODDDqJB9Zfs/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
|
Coding beyond Pyomo

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPJ8ZbKO7n8egc0Xhsb2wmVQsprTZ04OZmYy05qkwaY/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
|
Data 

data structure organisation on the openmod site 

|
- discussing the concept of a CKAN DB on the openmod-site 

- data storage 

- integrating data with the openmod website 

|-
| Modelling 
|
- incorporating geospatial data into models 

- <span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e28-d3a8-9ab6-7f67b5a13431">spatial and temporal weather data interpolation

|-
| Misc. 
| Publishing 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" |
| from talks
| 1) GIS Analyses for urban concepts;
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="5" | 2 
| [[:File:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yOFHokAGpWqY4WXZojncoJFSLAvUu2y5tuhivUILj98/edit?usp=sharing|Data management]] 
|
- data management best practices 

(continuing discussion - data quality assurance)

|-
|
Data matching / Harmonization

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mH7jiVTXMF-xF2BrR88BUEK3bjKhGsafEu-Mdxubv4M/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
| Modelling 
|
- techniques for <span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e29-706c-d3c5-62b091c94674">flow based market coupling<span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline">, [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p_5A8aJhL5Q43DhZJp1Ut9lt8QgernsdUW9luMX5tGg/edit?usp=sharing electricity network modelling] 

- top-down modeling approach of electricity demand

|-
|
 

|
|-
| Misc. 
| Licensing 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="3" | 3 
| NN (free for further discussions) 
|
<span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e2b-6bcd-8aba-71eb0c1a427a"> 

|-
| Modelling 
|
- modeling workflows (Pyomo, Pandas, R, GAMS) 

- modeling best practices

- [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b-mdmP29hoCY1DyvBrVWV2VJrbobx0DFZLv7MkvRC2E/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
| [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mnPBwYTpsgNvU91MziFJ6KBvebTlug6mXFaBbJO3ULo/edit Outreach] 
|
 - objectives, target groups 

 - openmod online presence/platform

 - conferences, publications (which journals??)

 - projects

- interface between research and public

        - questions of data manipulation etc.

|}

 

 

 

 

 

=== Finding topics for break-out-groups ===

This table is an attempt to map the [[Open Energy Modelling Workshop - London 2015|Break-out-groups from the Third Workshop]] to a smaller number of covered topics.

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="1" frame="hsides" rules="rows"
|-
! colspan="2" rowspan="1" scope="col" | Third Workshop break-out-group name
! scope="col" | Covered topic(s)
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 1
| Open weather data
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 2
| Renewables.ninja
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 3
| Use of models in government and industry
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 4
| Model Factsheets
| Visibility
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 5
| Open model testing
| Coding
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 6
| Demand side and storage
| Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 7
| Wind potentials
| Open Data, Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 8
| Hydro electricity
| Open Data, Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 9
| The Open Power System Data platform
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 10
| Pros and cons of Open Source modelling
| Licensing, Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 11
| Energy modeling for beginners
| Coding, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 12
| OpenEnergy platform
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 13
| Open Access publishing in energy modelling
| Outreach, Publishing
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 14
| Openmod article
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 15
| Conference
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 16
| Funders best practice list
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 17
| Data sources hackathon
| Open Data, Coding
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 18
| Openmod website
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 19
| Which license fits my model?
| Licensing
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 20
| Consultation “Marktstammdatenregister” BNetzA
| Open Data, Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 21
| Load-flow modelling / grids
| Modelling, Tech
|-
| 22
| Python/Pyomo user group
| Coding, Modelling
|}

 

 

 

=== Proposed break-out-groups ===

With the previous mapping at hand, one could therefore propose the following topics. ''This list is open to discussion!''

#'''Open Data '''Most probable candidate for splitting in 2-3 different groups: covers data publishing (where and how), data acquisition (from where and how) and possibly data processing
#'''Modelling'''    (Mathematical) modelling techniques, algorithms, basically all conceptual work that is independent from the actual implementation (cf. '''Coding''').
#'''Tech'''    similar to '''Modelling''', but more focused on the specifics of specific technologies like fluctuating renewables, power grid, power plants (generators, turbines, ...). Probable candidate for splitting, if many participants with divergent interests come together
#'''Coding     '''software frameworks for modelling, data processing, optimisation, data visualisation; ask for tips, share tricks, present possibly helpful new stuff; possible split: introductory "course"-style group and a more advanced "sharing of experience"-style group
#'''Publishing'''    is about (Open Access|Traditional|Other) methods of publishing one's research
#'''Licensing'''    as about license questions for choosing the "right" license for one's own published works or for how to comply with the licenses of others' works. Possible overlap with '''Open Data'''
#'''Outreach'''    is about increasing awareness for open (energy) modelling community with Openmod as a common banner. This includes discussing the common mid- and long-term goals, presenting the current progress
#'''Visibility'''    is about increasing the reach of one's individual/institute's reach through various means. Possible overlap with '''Publishing'''

This list is of course open to discussion and change! '''Be bold''' and edit, suggest and edit on the talk page or the Openmod mailing list (currently the organisation of the break-out-groups is done on the [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qVM-eJBn9aYTW8ectX2hZ0QC3WesyInrtvWoMFRkiW4/edit# Break-out group Google Doc]). In the end, the existence of a break-out-groups lives and dies with people interested in discussing the proposed topics.

== Short talks and presentations ==

Please list your name and a proposed title of a specific topic or research activity that you would like to present (4 minutes talk, 1 minutes Q&A, maximum 3 ppt slides) 

#PyPSA: Network modelling with free software (Tom Brown)
#Using causal network analysis to measure electricity market synchronisation (Giorgio Castagneto-Gissey)
#Ensemble forecasting in district heating (Magnus Dahl)
#Urban energy systems modelling & the HUES platform (Andrew Bollinger)
#Concept of expanding the openmod online presence (introduction to the breakout group (outreach)) (Eva Wiechers/Martin Glauer) 
#open_eGo: Electricty Grid Optimization. GIS-Analyses for demand and generation data (Ludwig Schneider) 
#Using Open GIS-data and Models for Spatio-temporal Analysis of Urban Energy Systems (Alaa Alhamwi)
#ONSSET: A GIS based electrification planning tool using open datasets (Alexandros Korkovelos) 
#An open model management infrastrucuture: MoManI (Yousef Almulla)
#Model based analysis of policy measures and transformation pathways to a sustainable energy system in europe (Francesco Gardumi)
#state of open energy modelling framework (oemof) (Berit Müller)
#Opening Energy Modeling to unconventional participants, the early-stage case of MELiSsa (Fabrizio Fattori) 
#Building an open database of power plants (Johannes Friedrich)
#A very brief update on two projects: Open Power System Data (OPSD) and Renewables.ninja (Stefan Pfenninger)
#mosaik: A flexible smart grid co-simulation framework (Jan Sören Schwarz)
#Current Model Development and Data Management at IIASA (Matthew Gidden)
#Renewable energy potential considering theroretical, legal, technical and economic constraints (Pietro Zambelli)

== Tech talks ==

# [http://ojdo.de/openmod/160429-toy-models.pdf Toy optimisation models in three modelling languages] (Johannes Dorfner)
# Flow-based market clearing (FBMC)

 [[Events|Back to events overview]]

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Stockholm 2016

2016-04-29T12:51:44Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Proposed short talks and presentations */

This is the wiki page for the upcoming '''Fourth Workshop of the [http://openmod-initiative.org/ Open Energy Modelling Initiative]''', a grass-root organization of modellers from various European research institutes and universities. After two workshops in Berlin and one in London, the next one will be in '''Stockholm, Sweden hosted by [http://www.kth.se/en/itm/inst/energiteknik/forskning/desa/welcome-to-the-unit-of-energy-systems-analysis-kth-desa-1.197296/ KTH]'''.The workshop takes place on '''28-29 April, 2016'''. As always, there is no registration fee, so feel free to join! 

This wiki page will be updated frequently; with a program and practical information. All participants are invited to contribute suggestions of different sessions to be included in the program. And in the meantime, feel free to register on the [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative mailing list] where all things regarding energy modelling are discussed.

 

 

== Background ==

Energy models are widely used for policy advice and research. They serve to answer questions on energy policy, decarbonization, and transitions towards renewable energy sources. Yet, most energy models are black boxes – even to fellow researchers. This is what we want to change. We are a group of modellers from various universities and research institutes who want to promote open energy modelling. We believe that Open Source models and Open Data will advance knowledge and lead to better energy policies. Our mission is to enable Open Source energy modelling by providing a platform for collaboration as well as tools along the full value chain of energy economics and energy system models. That is why we founded the Open Energy Modelling Initiative (openmod initiative) just a year ago. You are welcome to join us for our next workshop!

 

 

 

== Practical information ==

[[File:KTH campus.JPG|left|300px|alt=KTH campus.JPG]] 

Venue: KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm  Map: [https://goo.gl/maps/rrmJwDPzS382 https://goo.gl/maps/rrmJwDPzS382] 

Dates: 28-29 April, 2016

Begin: Thursday (28 April) 10.00 End: Friday (29 April) 16:00

Day 1 (Thursday, 28/04) will be in [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 room M311, Brinellvägen 68] and Day 2 (Friday, 29/04) will be in [https://goo.gl/maps/tLxHaKn55p42 ‘Salongen’, KTH Library] 

[https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative Join our mailing list] to receive updates. Fee: no registration fee, but you will need to cover your own food and lodging expenses.

Accommodation option: [http://www.booking.com/hotel/se/elite-arcadia.en-gb.html?aid=311984;label=elite-arcadia-FxM5qzBbBwoKMW*sBkmKgAS72034809313:pl:ta:p1:p2:ac:ap1t2:neg:fi:tiaud-146342138470:kwd-9075294584:lp9062457:li:dec:dm;sid=32462409aa91f156f9d0002661f704d5;dcid=4;dist=0;room1=A,A;sb_price_type=total;srfid=6b6ac29d58c3ce5838fec633122e0413c52c78e5X1;type=total;ucfs=1& Elite Hotel Arcadia] is the closest hotel to the venue.

 

[[File:DESA logo.png|left|300px|alt=DESA logo.png]] 

The workshop is hosted by the [http://www.kth.se/en/itm/inst/energiteknik/forskning/desa/welcome-to-the-unit-of-energy-systems-analysis-kth-desa-1.197296/ Unit of Energy Systems Analysis, KTH].

Live streaming of the workshop is available [https://connect.sunet.se/r1mudmbgzt2/ here]!

 

 

== Registration ==

'''We've now reached the upper size limit of the rooms booked for the workshop (50 people), so registration is closed!''' If addition space becomes available, we will re-open the registration.

 All the information that you entered in the form is visible on the [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12PuGA4PhUP5oJgPDT7SfIHxU4VIJDvh-JI4wtFjwyvQ/ participant list], apart from your email address which is kept private.

If you run into any problems with the registration, drop an email to Tom Brown (brown at fias.uni-frankfurt.de).

If you would like to give a 4-minute talk, please edit the list of talks below (you have to create an account on the wiki and log in first - see the buttons at the top right of this page).

 

== Participants ==

Everyone who has registered is visible on the [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12PuGA4PhUP5oJgPDT7SfIHxU4VIJDvh-JI4wtFjwyvQ/ participant list].

 

 

 

 

 

== Proposed Programme ==

'''Thursday morning (Venue: [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 M311, Brinellvägen 68])'''

''10.00                   Start''

10.00 – 10.05      Welcome and important information (Abhi)

10.05 – 10.15      What is open-mod (Stefan)

10.15 – 10.45      Introduction (everyone)

10.45 – 11.30      Short talks and presentations (1-8) (plenary)

''11:30 – 11:45      Coffee break''

11.45 – 12.30      Short talks and presentations (9-17) (plenary)

''12.30 – 13.30      Lunch'' 

  

'''Thursday afternoon (Venue: [https://www.kth.se/places/room/id/be5016e0-5285-410e-aedc-3caf501af627 M311, Brinellvägen 68])'''

13.30 – 13.45      Introducing break-out groups (plenary) 

13.45 – 15.00      Break-out groups 1 (parallel)

15.00 – 15.30      Reporting back (plenary)

''15.30 – 15.45      Coffee break''

15.45 – 16.00      Introducing break-out groups (plenary)

16.00 – 17.15      Break-out groups 2 (parallel)

17.15 – 17.30      Reporting back (plenary)

''18.00                   End of day''

''19.30                    Dinner at [https://goo.gl/maps/1ErWcB3Xy9U2 Restaurang Cypern]''

 

'''Friday morning (Venue: [https://goo.gl/maps/AgP2c9WmWz82 'Salongen', KTH Library])'''

''10.00                    Start''

10.00  – 10.15      Summary of first day

10.15  – 10.30      Introducing break-out groups

''10.30'' – ''10.45       Coffee break'' 

10.45 – 12.00       Break-out groups 3 (parallel)

12.00 – 12.30       Reporting back (plenary)

''12.30 – 13.30       Lunch'' 

  

'''Friday afternoon (Venue: [https://goo.gl/maps/AgP2c9WmWz82 'Salongen', KTH Library])'''

13.30 – 14.30       TechTalks or other discussion 

14.30 – 15.30       Wrap up, next workshop

''16.00                    End of workshop''

 

 

 

== Break-out-groups ==

A break-out-group is a workshop-like gathering of interested individuals for a timespan of 2-3 hours to actively discuss a common topic. All groups feature 1-2 organisers whose responsibility is to moderate the discussion and capture any results in written form (preferably in a shared Google Document [for easier simultaneous editing of all participants]).

The Third Workshop featured a total 22 break-out groups, which were considered too numerous in hindsight. At the same time, the breadth of covered topics. This section is the attempt to bundle similar break-out-group topics under more general labels to reduce the number of groups, while keeping their total scope as broad as possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

=== Proposed Break-out Groups by Session ===

{| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" style="width: 100%"
|-
| Session 
| Theme 
| Topics 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="6" | 1 
|
Data 

collecting data

 

|
- general collecting data sources for the wiki, improving the [[Data|data wiki]] and [[Data requirements for a European energy system model|Data requirements for a European energy system model]] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dQMBTKkZxB4pkG4qP6pVk2AU5U6rgJrcxJJbYDQLaP8/edit data collection google doc]

- data quality assurance

- [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JvS1HnJxlV9oZitUkoLIZm4Ar2fo3gBHckNveks5WiU/edit?usp=sharing Power Grid Data]

- Power plant data [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-983-sapx66olJNcvucsFT70hi_ZE4lrmVqZIf9dhrU/edit Power Plant Data google doc]

- Weather and climate data:
<ul style="margin-left: 40px;">
<li>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_JF-PMAudL3xyWOI4NmfQM36zFl_VWjqnQEg24UGD_s/edit?usp=sharing Google doc notes]</li>
<li>[https://docs.google.com/document/d/188I99Euu1fQU_yplThq-mpjhBEhK-7cU6U5dA6IShpY/edit?usp=sharing Google doc notes from London 2015 workshop]</li>
</ul>

|-
|
Water/Energy model coupling

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WK-CFJSfs3oVavqxMO6W6HqQ_TdcdYuSODDDqJB9Zfs/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
|
Coding beyond Pyomo

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPJ8ZbKO7n8egc0Xhsb2wmVQsprTZ04OZmYy05qkwaY/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
|
Data 

data structure organisation on the openmod site 

|
- discussing the concept of a CKAN DB on the openmod-site 

- data storage 

- integrating data with the openmod website 

|-
| Modelling 
|
- incorporating geospatial data into models 

- <span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e28-d3a8-9ab6-7f67b5a13431">spatial and temporal weather data interpolation

|-
| Misc. 
| Publishing 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" |
| from talks
| 1) GIS Analyses for urban concepts;
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="5" | 2 
| [[:File:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yOFHokAGpWqY4WXZojncoJFSLAvUu2y5tuhivUILj98/edit?usp=sharing|Data management]] 
|
- data management best practices 

(continuing discussion - data quality assurance)

|-
|
Data matching / Harmonization

|
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mH7jiVTXMF-xF2BrR88BUEK3bjKhGsafEu-Mdxubv4M/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
| Modelling 
|
- techniques for <span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e29-706c-d3c5-62b091c94674">flow based market coupling<span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline">, [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p_5A8aJhL5Q43DhZJp1Ut9lt8QgernsdUW9luMX5tGg/edit?usp=sharing electricity network modelling] 

- top-down modeling approach of electricity demand

|-
|
 

|
|-
| Misc. 
| Licensing 
|-
| style="text-align: center" colspan="1" rowspan="3" | 3 
| NN (free for further discussions) 
|
<span style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline" id="docs-internal-guid-5c0cbece-4e2b-6bcd-8aba-71eb0c1a427a"> 

|-
| Modelling 
|
- modeling workflows (Pyomo, Pandas, R, GAMS) 

- modeling best practices

- [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b-mdmP29hoCY1DyvBrVWV2VJrbobx0DFZLv7MkvRC2E/edit?usp=sharing google doc]

|-
| [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mnPBwYTpsgNvU91MziFJ6KBvebTlug6mXFaBbJO3ULo/edit Outreach] 
|
 - objectives, target groups 

 - openmod online presence/platform

 - conferences, publications (which journals??)

 - projects

- interface between research and public

        - questions of data manipulation etc.

|}

 

 

 

 

 

=== Finding topics for break-out-groups ===

This table is an attempt to map the [[Open Energy Modelling Workshop - London 2015|Break-out-groups from the Third Workshop]] to a smaller number of covered topics.

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="1" frame="hsides" rules="rows"
|-
! colspan="2" rowspan="1" scope="col" | Third Workshop break-out-group name
! scope="col" | Covered topic(s)
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 1
| Open weather data
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 2
| Renewables.ninja
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 3
| Use of models in government and industry
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 4
| Model Factsheets
| Visibility
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 5
| Open model testing
| Coding
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 6
| Demand side and storage
| Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 7
| Wind potentials
| Open Data, Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 8
| Hydro electricity
| Open Data, Tech, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 9
| The Open Power System Data platform
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 10
| Pros and cons of Open Source modelling
| Licensing, Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 11
| Energy modeling for beginners
| Coding, Modelling
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 12
| OpenEnergy platform
| Open Data
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 13
| Open Access publishing in energy modelling
| Outreach, Publishing
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 14
| Openmod article
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 15
| Conference
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 16
| Funders best practice list
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 17
| Data sources hackathon
| Open Data, Coding
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 18
| Openmod website
| Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 19
| Which license fits my model?
| Licensing
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 20
| Consultation “Marktstammdatenregister” BNetzA
| Open Data, Outreach
|-
| style="text-align: right" | 21
| Load-flow modelling / grids
| Modelling, Tech
|-
| 22
| Python/Pyomo user group
| Coding, Modelling
|}

 

 

 

=== Proposed break-out-groups ===

With the previous mapping at hand, one could therefore propose the following topics. ''This list is open to discussion!''

#'''Open Data '''Most probable candidate for splitting in 2-3 different groups: covers data publishing (where and how), data acquisition (from where and how) and possibly data processing
#'''Modelling'''    (Mathematical) modelling techniques, algorithms, basically all conceptual work that is independent from the actual implementation (cf. '''Coding''').
#'''Tech'''    similar to '''Modelling''', but more focused on the specifics of specific technologies like fluctuating renewables, power grid, power plants (generators, turbines, ...). Probable candidate for splitting, if many participants with divergent interests come together
#'''Coding     '''software frameworks for modelling, data processing, optimisation, data visualisation; ask for tips, share tricks, present possibly helpful new stuff; possible split: introductory "course"-style group and a more advanced "sharing of experience"-style group
#'''Publishing'''    is about (Open Access|Traditional|Other) methods of publishing one's research
#'''Licensing'''    as about license questions for choosing the "right" license for one's own published works or for how to comply with the licenses of others' works. Possible overlap with '''Open Data'''
#'''Outreach'''    is about increasing awareness for open (energy) modelling community with Openmod as a common banner. This includes discussing the common mid- and long-term goals, presenting the current progress
#'''Visibility'''    is about increasing the reach of one's individual/institute's reach through various means. Possible overlap with '''Publishing'''

This list is of course open to discussion and change! '''Be bold''' and edit, suggest and edit on the talk page or the Openmod mailing list (currently the organisation of the break-out-groups is done on the googledoc: [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qVM-eJBn9aYTW8ectX2hZ0QC3WesyInrtvWoMFRkiW4/edit# https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qVM-eJBn9aYTW8ectX2hZ0QC3WesyInrtvWoMFRkiW4/edit#]). In the end, the existence of a break-out-groups lives and dies with people interested in discussing the proposed topics.

 

 

 

 

 

== Short talks and presentations ==

Please list your name and a proposed title of a specific topic or research activity that you would like to present (4 minutes talk, 1 minutes Q&A, maximum 3 ppt slides) 

#PyPSA: Network modelling with free software (Tom Brown)
#Using causal network analysis to measure electricity market synchronisation (Giorgio Castagneto-Gissey)
#Ensemble forecasting in district heating (Magnus Dahl)
#Urban energy systems modelling & the HUES platform (Andrew Bollinger)
#Concept of expanding the openmod online presence (introduction to the breakout group (outreach)) (Eva Wiechers/Martin Glauer) 
#open_eGo: Electricty Grid Optimization. GIS-Analyses for demand and generation data (Ludwig Schneider) 
#Using Open GIS-data and Models for Spatio-temporal Analysis of Urban Energy Systems (Alaa Alhamwi)
#ONSSET: A GIS based electrification planning tool using open datasets (Alexandros Korkovelos) 
#An open model management infrastrucuture: MoManI (Yousef Almulla)
#Model based analysis of policy measures and transformation pathways to a sustainable energy system in europe (Francesco Gardumi)
#state of open energy modelling framework (oemof) (Berit Müller)
#Opening Energy Modeling to unconventional participants, the early-stage case of MELiSsa (Fabrizio Fattori) 
#Building an open database of power plants (Johannes Friedrich)
#A very brief update on two projects: Open Power System Data (OPSD) and Renewables.ninja (Stefan Pfenninger)
#mosaik: A flexible smart grid co-simulation framework (Jan Sören Schwarz)
#Current Model Development and Data Management at IIASA (Matthew Gidden)
#Renewable energy potential considering theroretical, legal, technical and economic constraints (Pietro Zambelli)

== Tech talks ==

# [http://ojdo.de/openmod/160429-toy-models.pdf Toy optimisation models in three modelling languages] (Johannes Dorfner)
# Flow-based market clearing (FBMC)

 [[Events|Back to events overview]]

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Stockholm 2016

2016-02-19T13:08:18Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Proposed break-out-groups */

URBS

2016-02-16T17:23:02Z

Johannes Dorfner: updated DOI for new v0.5 release

{{Model
|Full_Model_Name=urbs
|author_institution=TUM EI ENS
|authors=Thomas Richter, Thomas Hamacher, Matthias Huber, Johannes Dorfner
|contact_persons=Johannes Dorfner
|contact_email=johannes.dorfner@tum.de
|website=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|source_download=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|text_description=URBS is a linear programming optimisation model for capacity expansion planning and unit commitment for distributed energy systems. Its name, latin for city, stems from its origin as a model for optimisation for urban energy systems. Since then, it has been adapted to multiple scales from neighbourhoods to continents.
|open_source_licensed=Yes
|license=GNU General Public License version 3.0 (GPL-3.0)
|model_source_public=Yes
|data_availability=some
|open_future=Yes
|modelling_software=Python (Pyomo)
|processing_software=Python (pandas et al)
|model_class=Energy Modelling Framework,
|sectors=User-dependent, Electricity
|technologies=Renewables, Conventional Generation, CHP
|decisions=dispatch, investment
|georegions=User-dependent
|georesolution=User-dependent
|timeresolution=Hour
|network_coverage=transmission, net transfer capacities
|math_modeltype=Optimization
|math_modeltype_shortdesc=Linear optimization model of a user-defined reference energy system.
|math_objective=Minimise total discounted cost of system
|deterministic=None
|is_suited_for_many_scenarios=Yes
|number_of_variables=100000
|computation_time_minutes=20
|computation_time_comments=Highly dependent on model size (esp. storage) and solver (CPLEX, GLPK, Gurobi)
|citation_doi=10.5281/zenodo.46118
|report_references=]]
* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/node?id=1171502 Electricity system optimization in the EUMENA region]; Matthias Huber, Johannes Dorfner, Thomas Hamacher; technical report, Munich, 2012
* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/doc/1233948/1233948.pdf Modelling a Low-Carbon Power System for Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore]; Juergen Stich, Melanie Mannhart, Thomas Zipperle, Tobias Massier, Matthias Huber, Thomas Hamacher; 33rd IEW International Energy Workshop, Peking, 2014
* [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.040 Transmission grid extensions for the integration of variable renewable energies in Europe: Who benefits where?]; Katrin Schaber, Florian Steinke, Thomas Hamacher; Energy Policy, Volume 43, April 2012, 123–135.
}}

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Stockholm 2016

2016-01-26T10:18:01Z

Johannes Dorfner:

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Stockholm 2016

2016-01-26T09:29:02Z

Johannes Dorfner:

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Stockholm 2016

2016-01-26T09:28:22Z

Johannes Dorfner:

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - Stockholm 2016

2016-01-26T09:26:42Z

Johannes Dorfner:

Events

2015-12-10T14:55:44Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Upcoming event */

Here you can find the details of events/workshops organized by the openmod initiative.

== Upcoming event ==

The upcoming '''[[Open_Energy_Modelling_Workshop_-_Stockholm_2016|Fourth Workshop of the Open Energy Modelling Initiative]]''' will be in '''Stockholm, Sweden hosted by [http://www.kth.se/en/itm/inst/energiteknik/forskning/desa/welcome-to-the-unit-of-energy-systems-analysis-kth-desa-1.197296/ KTH]''', from '''28-29 April, 2016'''. As always, there is no registration fee so feel free to join! The [[Open_Energy_Modelling_Workshop_-_Stockholm_2016|event wiki page]] will be updated frequently; with a program and practical information. All participants are invited to contribute suggestions of different sessions to be included in the program. And in the meantime, feel free to register on the [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative mailing list] where all things regarding energy modelling are discussed and updated on the workshop will be posted.

== Past events ==

*[[Founding workshop|Founding workshop]], Berlin, September 18./19, 2014
*[[2nd Open Energy Modelling Workshop|2nd Open Energy Modelling Workshop]], Berlin, April 13/14, 2015
*[[Open Energy Modelling Workshop - London 2015|Open Energy Modelling Workshop - London 2015]], Imperial College London, September 10/11, 2015

Talk:Open Models

2015-10-15T08:55:20Z

Johannes Dorfner: <nice-discussions-summary>

<div class="NiceDiscussions START">

==Auto-generated table==
I've updated the code to automatically grab some of the facts about the models that are stored on the pages.  I don't know if what I've put up there is the most useful collection of items, but if you look at the bottom of each of the model pages, you'll see a box with "Facts about...".  On the left side of this are the names of the properties which you can use with the inline query syntax (https://semantic-mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Inline_queries) on this page. [[User:Chris Davis|Chris Davis]] 8 October 2015, 14:13 (CEST)
:This is great! I would guess that the maintaining institution (shown as "by XYZ" on the model page) would be a great field to show. However, I could not figure out the correct syntax for that query. [[User:Johannes Dorfner|Johannes Dorfner]] 13 October 2015, 13:43 (CEST)
::<del>This is great! I would guess that the maintaining institution (shown as "by XYZ" on the model page) would be a great field to show. However, I could not figure out the correct syntax for that query.</del> '''Edit: '''thank you for adding the author institution field to the table. [[User:Johannes Dorfner|Johannes Dorfner]] 14 October 2015, 17:30 (CEST)
:::The fact box on the individual model pages should help you see the names of the properties that you can query.  You can also test out queries on http://wiki.openmod-initiative.org/wiki/Special:Ask [[User:Chris Davis|Chris Davis]] 14 October 2015, 19:17 (CEST)
::::For some reason (probably my browser caching, or just me not scrolling, ...) I did not see the generated attribute table below the "old" factsheet, so I thought I had to "guess" the correct attribute name spelling. [[User:Johannes Dorfner|Johannes Dorfner]] 15 October 2015, 10:55 (CEST)
</div>

Talk:Open Models

2015-10-14T15:30:21Z

Johannes Dorfner: <nice-discussions-summary>

URBS

2015-10-13T11:49:38Z

Johannes Dorfner:

{{Model
|Full_Model_Name=urbs
|author_institution=TUM EI ENS
|authors=Thomas Richter, Thomas Hamacher, Matthias Huber, Johannes Dorfner
|contact_persons=Johannes Dorfner
|contact_email=johannes.dorfner@tum.de
|website=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|source_download=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|text_description=URBS is a linear programming optimisation model for capacity expansion planning and unit commitment for distributed energy systems. Its name, latin for city, stems from its origin as a model for optimisation for urban energy systems. Since then, it has been adapted to multiple scales from neighbourhoods to continents.
|open_source_licensed=Yes
|license=GNU General Public License version 3.0 (GPL-3.0)
|model_source_public=Yes
|data_availability=some
|open_future=Yes
|modelling_software=Python (Pyomo)
|processing_software=Python (pandas et al)
|model_class=Energy Modelling Framework,
|sectors=User-dependent, Electricity
|technologies=Renewables, Conventional Generation, CHP
|decisions=dispatch, investment
|georegions=User-dependent
|georesolution=User-dependent
|timeresolution=Hour
|network_coverage=transmission, net transfer capacities
|math_modeltype=Optimization
|math_modeltype_shortdesc=Linear optimization model of a user-defined reference energy system.
|math_objective=Minimise total discounted cost of system
|deterministic=None
|is_suited_for_many_scenarios=Yes
|number_of_variables=100000
|computation_time_minutes=20
|computation_time_comments=Highly dependent on model size (esp. storage) and solver (CPLEX, GLPK, Gurobi)
|citation_doi=10.5281/zenodo.32038
|report_references=]]
* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/node?id=1171502 Electricity system optimization in the EUMENA region]; Matthias Huber, Johannes Dorfner, Thomas Hamacher; technical report, Munich, 2012
* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/doc/1233948/1233948.pdf Modelling a Low-Carbon Power System for Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore]; Juergen Stich, Melanie Mannhart, Thomas Zipperle, Tobias Massier, Matthias Huber, Thomas Hamacher; 33rd IEW International Energy Workshop, Peking, 2014
* [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.040 Transmission grid extensions for the integration of variable renewable energies in Europe: Who benefits where?]; Katrin Schaber, Florian Steinke, Thomas Hamacher; Energy Policy, Volume 43, April 2012, 123–135.
}}

URBS

2015-10-13T11:49:25Z

Johannes Dorfner:

{{Model
|Full_Model_Name=urbs
|author_institution=TUM EI ENS
|authors=Thomas Richter, Thomas Hamacher, Matthias Huber, Johannes Dorfner
|contact_persons=Johannes Dorfner
|contact_email=johannes.dorfner@tum.de
|website=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|source_download=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|text_description=URBS is a linear programming optimisation model for capacity expansion planning and unit commitment for distributed energy systems. Its name, latin for city, stems from its origin as a model for optimisation for urban energy systems. Since then, it has been adapted to multiple scales from neighbourhoods to continents.
|open_source_licensed=Yes
|license=GNU General Public License version 3.0 (GPL-3.0)
|model_source_public=Yes
|data_availability=some
|open_future=Yes
|modelling_software=Python (Pyomo)
|processing_software=Python (pandas et al)
|model_class=Energy Modelling Framework,
|sectors=User-dependent, Electricity
|technologies=Renewables, Conventional Generation, CHP
|decisions=dispatch, investment
|georegions=User-dependent
|georesolution=User-dependent
|timeresolution=Hour
|network_coverage=transmission, net transfer capacities
|math_modeltype=Optimization
|math_modeltype_shortdesc=Linear optimization model of a user-defined reference energy system.
|math_objective=Minimise total discounted cost of system
|deterministic=None
|is_suited_for_many_scenarios=Yes
|number_of_variables=100000
|computation_time_minutes=20
|computation_time_comments=Highly dependent on model size (esp. storage) and solver (CPLEX, GLPK, Gurobi)
|citation_doi=10.5281/zenodo.32038
|report_references=
* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/node?id=1171502 Electricity system optimization in the EUMENA region]; Matthias Huber, Johannes Dorfner, Thomas Hamacher; technical report, Munich, 2012
* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/doc/1233948/1233948.pdf Modelling a Low-Carbon Power System for Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore]; Juergen Stich, Melanie Mannhart, Thomas Zipperle, Tobias Massier, Matthias Huber, Thomas Hamacher; 33rd IEW International Energy Workshop, Peking, 2014
* [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.040 Transmission grid extensions for the integration of variable renewable energies in Europe: Who benefits where?]; Katrin Schaber, Florian Steinke, Thomas Hamacher; Energy Policy, Volume 43, April 2012, 123–135.
}}

URBS

2015-10-13T11:48:59Z

Johannes Dorfner:

{{Model
|Full_Model_Name=urbs
|author_institution=TUM EI ENS
|authors=Thomas Richter, Thomas Hamacher, Matthias Huber, Johannes Dorfner
|contact_persons=Johannes Dorfner
|contact_email=johannes.dorfner@tum.de
|website=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|source_download=https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs
|text_description=URBS is a linear programming optimisation model for capacity expansion planning and unit commitment for distributed energy systems. Its name, latin for city, stems from its origin as a model for optimisation for urban energy systems. Since then, it has been adapted to multiple scales from neighbourhoods to continents.
|open_source_licensed=Yes
|license=GNU General Public License version 3.0 (GPL-3.0)
|model_source_public=Yes
|data_availability=some
|open_future=Yes
|modelling_software=Python (Pyomo)
|processing_software=Python (pandas et al)
|model_class=Energy Modelling Framework,
|sectors=User-dependent, Electricity
|technologies=Renewables, Conventional Generation, CHP
|decisions=dispatch, investment
|georegions=User-dependent
|georesolution=User-dependent
|timeresolution=Hour
|network_coverage=transmission, net transfer capacities
|math_modeltype=Optimization
|math_modeltype_shortdesc=Linear optimization model of a user-defined reference energy system.
|math_objective=Minimise total discounted cost of system
|deterministic=None
|is_suited_for_many_scenarios=Yes
|number_of_variables=100000
|computation_time_minutes=20
|computation_time_comments=Highly dependent on model size (esp. storage) and solver (CPLEX, GLPK, Gurobi)
|citation_doi=10.5281/zenodo.32038
|report_references=* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/node?id=1171502 Electricity system optimization in the EUMENA region]; Matthias Huber, Johannes Dorfner, Thomas Hamacher; technical report, Munich, 2012
* [https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/doc/1233948/1233948.pdf Modelling a Low-Carbon Power System for Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore]; Juergen Stich, Melanie Mannhart, Thomas Zipperle, Tobias Massier, Matthias Huber, Thomas Hamacher; 33rd IEW International Energy Workshop, Peking, 2014
* [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.040 Transmission grid extensions for the integration of variable renewable energies in Europe: Who benefits where?]; Katrin Schaber, Florian Steinke, Thomas Hamacher; Energy Policy, Volume 43, April 2012, 123–135.
}}

Talk:Open Models

2015-10-13T11:43:29Z

Johannes Dorfner: <nice-discussions-summary>

Choosing a license

2015-09-18T12:02:13Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Data */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

The following sections elaborate on both options for each type of work: code, data, and other.
 

== Code ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives a more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

The go-to solution for data licenses comes from the [http://opendatacommons.org/ Open Data Commons] that have created the following three licenses, and a nice [http://opendatacommons.org/guide/ 2-minute guide] on the why and how of data licensing.

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* The [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By)] (analog to CC BY) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation. It basically only to mention the contributors to the original database
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)] is even more permissive and does neither require attribution nor force a derived work under any specific license conditions.

*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been reworked since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties. See also the related question [http://opendata.stackexchange.com/questions/5995/are-creative-commons-licenses-suitable-for-data are CC licenses suitable for data?] on StackExchange.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published. First, the two "free licenses" are presented:

* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY], short for attributions ("by" whom was the work created?), requests to name the source when sharing the work or a derived work.
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC BY-SA] is similar to the GPL as it requires any derived works to be published under a "compatible" (easiest: the same) license. It is therefore the license used by Wikipedia.

Only the previous two licenses qualify as "free" licenses, as they do not restrict, what a user may do with the licensed work.

* The non-commercial (NC) option allows to prohibit any "commercial" usage of one's work. However, it is notoriously hard to define ''what exactly is'' a commercial activity. This problem is explained in great detailed in the brochure [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module "non-commercial use only"]. Anyway, the two resulting licenses are consequently called [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ CC BY-NC] and, with the share-alike option, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ CC BY-NC-SA].
* If you do not want any changes or improvements to your work to be shared or redistributed, the "no derivatives" (ND) is available. Its main use is by musicians that only want their music to be shared by listeners, but not allowing remixes or cover version. The resulting licenses are [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ CC BY-ND] or, by combining it with the NC tag, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CC BY-NC-ND].

For inspiration, the Creative Commons homepage also lists [https://creativecommons.org/examples a host of example projects licensed under all different licenses] to give an impression which situation triggered which decision by the presented individuals.
 

= FAQ =

== Why is it a bad idea to use Creative Commons licenses for code? ==
Long answer is in the question [http://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/1717/why-is-cc-by-sa-discouraged-for-code Why is CC BY-SA discouraged for code?] on StackExchange.

Short answer: the license is written for creative works (music, film, texts), not software code. Therefore, it leaves many important details (what consitutes a "derived" work, is linking allowed, what about patents?) unspecified. So: don't use CC licenses for code.

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements FAQ on contributor agreements on opensource.org], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements Civic Commons article on contributor agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]
* The Journal of Open Research Software (JORS) is a journal dedicated to publishing Open Source research software. It is therefore a useful outlet to publish software source code in, and then be able to reference it from other articles: http://openresearchsoftware.metajnl.com/

Choosing a license

2015-09-17T12:21:16Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* FAQ */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

The following sections elaborate on both options for each type of work: code, data, and other.
 

== Code ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives a more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

The go-to solution for data licenses comes from the [http://opendatacommons.org/ Open Data Commons] that have created the following three licenses, and a nice [http://opendatacommons.org/guide/ 2-minute guide] on the why and how of data licensing.

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* The [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By)] (analog to CC BY) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation. It basically only to mention the contributors to the original database
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)] is even more permissive and does neither require attribution nor force a derived work under any specific license conditions.

*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been reworked since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published. First, the two "free licenses" are presented:

* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY], short for attributions ("by" whom was the work created?), requests to name the source when sharing the work or a derived work.
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC BY-SA] is similar to the GPL as it requires any derived works to be published under a "compatible" (easiest: the same) license. It is therefore the license used by Wikipedia.

Only the previous two licenses qualify as "free" licenses, as they do not restrict, what a user may do with the licensed work.

* The non-commercial (NC) option allows to prohibit any "commercial" usage of one's work. However, it is notoriously hard to define ''what exactly is'' a commercial activity. This problem is explained in great detailed in the brochure [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module "non-commercial use only"]. Anyway, the two resulting licenses are consequently called [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ CC BY-NC] and, with the share-alike option, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ CC BY-NC-SA].
* If you do not want any changes or improvements to your work to be shared or redistributed, the "no derivatives" (ND) is available. Its main use is by musicians that only want their music to be shared by listeners, but not allowing remixes or cover version. The resulting licenses are [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ CC BY-ND] or, by combining it with the NC tag, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CC BY-NC-ND].

For inspiration, the Creative Commons homepage also lists [https://creativecommons.org/examples a host of example projects licensed under all different licenses] to give an impression which situation triggered which decision by the presented individuals.
 

= FAQ =

== Why is it a bad idea to use Creative Commons licenses for code? ==
Long answer is in the question [http://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/1717/why-is-cc-by-sa-discouraged-for-code Why is CC BY-SA discouraged for code?] on StackExchange.

Short answer: the license is written for creative works (music, film, texts), not software code. Therefore, it leaves many important details (what consitutes a "derived" work, is linking allowed, what about patents?) unspecified. So: don't use CC licenses for code.

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements FAQ on contributor agreements on opensource.org], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements Civic Commons article on contributor agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]
* The Journal of Open Research Software (JORS) is a journal dedicated to publishing Open Source research software. It is therefore a useful outlet to publish software source code in, and then be able to reference it from other articles: http://openresearchsoftware.metajnl.com/

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - London 2015

2015-09-17T10:16:51Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Participants */

Welcome to the wiki page of the upcoming '''Third Workshop of the [http://openmod-initiative.org/ Open Energy Modelling Initiative]''', a grass-root organization of modellers from various European research institutes and universities. After two workshops in Berlin, we will be guest at Imperial College's [http://www.imperial.ac.uk/grantham Grantham Institute]. The workshop takes place September 10/11. As always, there is no registration fee. 

It will be a ''work''-shop in the sense of the word, with only little time devoted to plenary presentation and most time to hands-on parallel sessions (break-out groups). This is a wiki page that will be updated frequently, and all participants are invited to contribute.

'''See [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1KZW5drgvf22j8EqHxKLzw live-stream], and watch recordings of previous workshops.'''

== Background  ==

Energy models are widely used for policy advice and research. They serve to answer questions on energy policy, decarbonization, and transitions towards renewable energy sources. Yet, most energy models are black boxes – even to fellow researchers. This is what we want to change. We are a group of modellers from various universities and research institutes who want to promote open energy modelling. We believe that Open Source models and Open Data will advance knowledge and lead to better energy policies. Our mission is to enable Open Source energy modelling by providing a platform for collaboration as well as tools along the full value chain of energy economics and energy system models. That is why we founded the Open Energy Modelling Initiative (openmod initiative) just a year ago. You are welcome to join us for our next workshop!

After two extremely fruitful and encouraging workshops in Berlin ([[Founding workshop|Sept 2014]], [[2nd Open Energy Modelling Workshop|April 2015]]), we will have our next workshop in London with an even more international focus. The aim is to give researchers a chance to present their own contributions to the field of open energy modelling and data, as well as to provide a forum to exchange ideas and work on concrete projects of the openmod initiative and more generally in the field of open energy modelling and data.

 

 

== Practical information ==

[[File:The Royal School of Mines building on Imperial College London's South Kensington Campus.jpg|left|x225px|Imperial College, Royal School of Mines|alt=Imperial College, Royal School of Mines|link=]] 

Venue: London, Imperial College, Royal School of Mines Building Map: [https://goo.gl/maps/zZu3T https://goo.gl/maps/zZu3T] 

10/11 September 2015 Begin: Thursday (10 September) 10.00 End: Friday (11 September) 16:00 

Sign up: register on the Wiki, and add yourself to "participants" [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative Join our mailing list] to receive updates 

Fee: no registration fee, but you will need to cover your own food and lodging expenses.

Accommodation option: [http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/summeraccommodation Imperial College student halls of residence] can be booked as a bed and breakfast.

 

[[File:Grantham Institute Logo.jpg|none|300px|alt=Grantham Institute Logo.jpg]] 

The workshop is hosted by the [http://www.imperial.ac.uk/grantham Grantham Institute - Climate Change and the Environment].

== Programme ==

'''Thursday morning'''

''From 9:30            Coffee/tea available''

''10.00                   Start''

10.00 – 10.05      Welcome and important information (Stefan)

10.05 – 10.15      What is open-mod (Lion)

10.15 – 10.45      Introduction (everyone)

10.45 – 11.30      Model presentations 1 (plenary)

''11:30 – 11:45      Coffee break''

11.45 – 12.30      Model presentations 2 (plenary)

12.30 – 13.00      Introducing break-out groups (plenary)                 

''12.15 – 13.15      Lunch (on Imperial College campus)''

 

'''Thursday afternoon'''

13.15 – 15.00      Break-out groups 1 (parallel)

15.00 – 15.30      Reporting back (plenary)

''15.30 – 15.45      Coffee break''

15.45 – 16.15      Introducing break-out groups (plenary)

16.15 – 17.30      Break-out groups 2 (parallel)

17.30 – 18.00      Reporting back (plenary)

''18.00                   End of day''

''18:30                   Dinner and drinks at the [https://goo.gl/maps/1wJgS Builder's Arms] pub''

 

'''Friday morning'''

''9.00                      Start''

9.00  – 9.15          Summary of first day

9.15  – 9.30          Introducing break-out groups

9.30 – 11.00         Break-out groups 3 (parallel), 

''11.00'' – ''11.30       Coffee break''

11.30 – 12.00       Reporting back (plenary)

12.00 – 13.00       TechTalk ([http://neon-energie.de/Self-archiving.pdf Self-archiving], Sharing docs, [http://d3js.org/ D3JS], [https://zenodo.org/ Zenodo], [https://www3.nd.edu/~jeff/mathprog/ GLPK in a web browser], [http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.502751.de/dp1475.pdf Prices in MIPs])

''13.00 – 14.00       Lunch (on Imperial College campus)''

 

'''Friday afternoon'''

14.00 – 15.00      Wrap up, next workshop

''15.00                   End of workshop''

== Model presentations ==

The goal of this session is to get a flavor what people do: What questions are they interested in? What kind of models they apply? Which software tools do they use? How do they interact with the modelling community? This is not about presenting a research paper or discussing in-depth modelling methodology. Not more than 2-3 slides per presentation. 

#[http://nemo.ozlabs.org/ NEMO], an open source electricity modelling tool (Ben Elliston, remote) ([[:File:01 - Ben Elliston - Openmod-Elliston.pdf|slide]]) 
#The [http://www.energycommunity.org/ LEAP software system], a software tool for integrated energy planning and climate change mitigation scenario analysis (Charlie Heaps) ([[:File:06 - Charlie Heaps - Heaps, Charlie.pdf|slide)]]
#Tools for Energy Model Optimization and Analysis ([http://www.temoaproject.org/ Temoa]) (Joe DeCarolis) [[:File:02 - Joe DeCarolis - DeCarolis openmod 2015.pdf|(slide)]]
#The [http://www.scigrid.de/ SciGRID] model, a network model based on OpenStreetMap (Wided Medjroubi)[[:File:03 - wided medjroubi - Medjroubi Wided.pdf|(slide)]]
#CREST Demand Model v2.0 - An open-source high-resolution stochastic integrated thermal-electrical domestic demand simulation tool (Eoghan McKenna)[[:File:04 - Eoghan McKenna - Eoghan McKenna.pptx|(slide)]] 
#[https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs urbs] and [https://github.com/ojdo/rivus rivus], two energy system models based on Python (Johannes Dorfner) [[:File:05 - Johannes Dorfner - dorfner urbs-rivus.pdf|(slide)]]
#The European Power Market model [https://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/hirth/data/emma.pdf EMMA](Lion Hirth) ([[:File:07 - Lion Hirth - Lion - EMMA.pdf|slide]]) 
#The [http://open-power-system-data.org/ Open Power System Data] platform, a data hub for power system data (Clemens Gerbaulet) 
#Open Energy-Modelling Platform [http://www.rl-institut.de/en/research/optimised_systems/oemof oemof] (Guido Pleßmann) [[:File:09 - Guido Pleßmann - 2015 09 09 OpenEnergy Platform Guido.pptx|(slide)]] 
#UCED model based on high spatial resolution wind dataset for the UK power system (Thomas Spitz) [[:File:10 - Thomas Spitz - Thomas Spitz.pptx|(slide)]]
#[https://setis.ec.europa.eu/publications/jrc-setis-reports/dispa-set-20-unit-commitment-and-power-dispatch-model DispaSET] - Open-Source unit commitment and optimal dispatch model (Sylvain Quoilin, JRC) [[:File:11 - S Q - 150910 - OpenMod.pptx|(slide)]]

 

== Break-out-groups ==

In parallel sessions, we break out into smaller groups to get work done. On the last workshop, we started drafting an article on open modelling, re-worked the openmod-website, compiled an overview of applicable licenses, and developed recommendations for power plant identifiers, among other things.

All groups report back to the plenary and document their work.

 

=== Proposed break-out groups ===

 

Group work shall be documented. Klick on "Results" to open a Google document for documentation.

 

#Open weather data - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/188I99Euu1fQU_yplThq-mpjhBEhK-7cU6U5dA6IShpY/edit#heading=h.e1kj7nxfvoo7 Results] | [[Data|Data Wiki]]
#Renewables.ninja - [https://drive.google.com/open?id=1c2wXT8gFaWh5Mba_rFzyi6arpziJ4O1iPgJplN9ijrc Results]
#Use of models in government and industry - [https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wSVtEM3ea_xLPEbKjqfF8qlSugp4GrRl6VI-aUWiyPQ Results]
#Model [[Open Models|Factsheets]] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Rg6f9iGyVcW7o4SolGi_cstwa66tZiOMVQyzmT1PRsA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Open model testing - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zBdtjd7cVUdrIbK80afjXHNKHI864M2uwC5bLRI6SVo/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Demand side and storage - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Is7yTSm_b87N7qTea5NBiIHemRVA-CzW4raMPrmGyrY/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Wind potentials - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wi3rIjEU5emKm-rxGT3ED9DnSDdkEGZYD3zdYcebKFc/edit?usp=sharing Results] | [[Data|Data Wiki]]
#Hydro electricity - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xmZbse_Vy04i8q7Ws-fyZ1GdWlvDd3Bd58D0wOJTayI/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#The [http://open-power-system-data.org/ Open Power System Data] platform - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W0xZILYBypoEEPMVixA4TRti4TBZlSgpoLxiCXUwxV0/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Pros and cons of Open Source modelling - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/11pdFDq_VP0HjeD-j7C7mC4PkqzUgbrI2mxCkCJQ2slU/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Energy modeling for beginners
#OpenEnergy platform - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/16QY4U-DBXhZVxXnpugVkATDtp4SEMjXTgdnYX4CRKWA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Open Access publishing in energy modelling - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/18AAApjM9dgzdx9zmV70eAkBbAK1L98iIkj_4xKbaP5I/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Openmod article - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/127MpVdO8SV6zvLDjWogD48jmtWMkcNN4k54bm1cdS0Q/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Conference - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IGGQzKGV2BBkew47l4FPg_jEe-KvOCkJBleg0bOqInk/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CELP_XxPqxcE_002J7Qvwz6MAJBfyVvJtSt6GWgME-4/edit Funders best practice list] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/15cMucOXnfS1FRYqRfPJvvdwk7vwfANuW4ONtLu5JltA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#[[Data|Data sources]] hackathon - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IZ8AlXLPM2NsKtKfRJkEuoTr_Pn-0yMSGJMqc81ucgc/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#[http://openmod-initiative.org/ Openmod website] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1D0m1cy5dAWKyhaArOZwgrlEf4V-iJm-SFbLXEhtt1KA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Which license fits my model? - [[Choosing a license|Wiki]]
#Consultation “Marktstammdatenregister” [http://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/cln_1432/DE/Sachgebiete/ElektrizitaetundGas/Unternehmen_Institutionen/DatenaustauschundMonitoring/MaStR/Datendefinitionen/mastr_datendefinitionen-node.html BNetzA] - [[Marktstammdaten|Wiki]] 
#Load-flow modelling / grids
#<span id="docs-internal-guid-c3167b5a-b7d1-d1ea-d6b1-c4ddf6b8d62b" style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline">Python/Pyomo user group - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/16FF17l-Kw-6Ac4dZQiR2bSOazZibJBMAUsR9xHQ04BY/edit?usp=sharing Results]

 

Details are collected in this [https://docs.google.com/document/d/16Hs_JuK56fV9xUVqrWg3zAp-RepjSSA37mj5JfdCbSg/edit#heading=h.8xn9p9kiati3 Google document]. Please fill in missing spots. You are invited to add your name to the group you wish to coordinate or participate in. Expect more groups to be announced in site!

 

 

 

=== Break out groups from last workshop ===

Some of these groups may wish to continue based on the outcomes from the last workshop:

*Transparency checklist for scenarios (Felix) [[:File:Openmod-Transparency Energy Scenarios-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iWV6HNLcuU3NaTLQnIHYFAIIWEnt-Db-FCSg-SJTTyU/edit Results]
*Model fact sheets and website (Jörn) [[:File:Openmod-Website-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f0UFdvb4QM1VNAWYVdWpHnYIttl9n4GApNA-jITvwpI/edit Results]
*Which license fits my model? (Frauke) [[:File:Openmod whichLicenseFits-breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x8BH1Ev53d6MY8y72cXtbw24uCLk4vaHy2JtGW_iSws/edit Results]
*Open energy system data - concrete steps for collaboration (Simon S) [[:File:Openmod-Concrete steps for open data collaboration-Breakout.pdf|Openmod-Concrete steps for open data collaboration-Breakout.pdf]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/179Y1f9U_FuDMWQOJu8Q_1HbUZyzkH52YGws3h4ztk_A/edit# Results]
*Unique identifies for European power plants: how to we get there? (Chris) [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CL8jKuPkGOLKijcwqxtlTz8-Y0EEN0guGPjs6Vo3OcQ/edit?usp=sharing Results]
*Open energy system data - concrete steps for collaboration (Simon S) [[:File:Openmod-Concrete steps for open data collaboration-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/179Y1f9U_FuDMWQOJu8Q_1HbUZyzkH52YGws3h4ztk_A/edit# Results] 
*"Best practice" catalogue for funders (Lion) [[:File:Openmod-Best practice-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CELP_XxPqxcE_002J7Qvwz6MAJBfyVvJtSt6GWgME-4/edit Results] 
*Article on benefits and challenges of open source (Eva) [[:File:Openmod-Article-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/13ZzPHsHnakOjqlDvJphw3bvEVGILYGT7unL-FI4lCmw/edit# Results]
*Weather data [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1USIAqOmEPnP7dNmECOPHIvX9ZYjTU7_ySnluHI4vZfw/edit Results]
*establish a conference on (open) energy system modeling - concrete steps (Berit)

 

== Participants ==

Registration deadline: 10th August 2015

#Stefan Pfenninger (Imperial College London) 
#Lion Hirth (neon) 
#Ingmar Schlecht (University of Basel) 
#Iain Staffell (Imperial College Business School)
#Richard Green (Imperial College Business School)
#[http://wiki.openmod-initiative.org/wiki/User:Johannes_Dorfner Johannes Dorfner] ([http://www.ens.ei.tum.de/de/staff/johannes-dorfner/ Technische Universität München])
#Clemens Gerbaulet (Technische Universität Berlin)
#Ed Sharp (University College London) 
#Catalina Spataru (University College London)
#Mark Barrett (University College London)
#Graeme Hawker ([[User:Graeme Hawker|profile]]) (University of Strathclyde)
#Warren Hicks (Reading University) 
#Alejandro Dávila (university of Groningen)
#Adrien Schwane (Forschungszentrum Jülich)
#Jörn Richstein (TU Delft, probably via remote link)
#Alice Gunn (University of Reading) 
#Abhishek Shivakumar (KTH) 
#[http://nworbmot.org/energy/publications.html Tom Brown] (from October: Frankfurt Institute of Advanced Studies) 
#Giorgio Castagneto Gissey (University College London)
#James Price (UCL)
#David Kleinhans (NEXT ENERGY)
#Wided Medjroubi (NEXT ENERGY)
#CarstenMatke (NEXT ENERGY)
#Daniel Drew (University of Reading)
#Francesco Gardumi (Politecnico di Milano)
#Daniel Crow (Imperial College) 
#Simon Tindemans (Imperial College)
#Guido Pleßmann (Reiner Lemoine Institut [someone else of the institute]) 
#Verena Viskovic (University College London)
#Daniel Huppmann (DIW Berlin) ([http://dergelbesalon.at/dh personal website])
#Martin Jahn (Europa-Universität Flensburg)
#Wolf-Dieter Bunke (Europa-Universität Flensburg)
#Joe DeCarolis (NC State University)
#Philip Sandwell (Imperial College London)
#Philip Sargent (DECC: Dept. of Energy and Climate Change)
#Frank Obermüller (ewi ER&S, Cologne)
#Koen van Dam (Imperial College London)
#Thomas Spitz (University of Edinburgh)
#Heidi Heinrichs (Forschungszentrum Jülich)
#Sheridan Few (Grantham Institute for Climate Change, Imperial College London)
#Florian Steiner (Grantham Institute for Climate Change, Imperial College London)
#Ajay Gambhir (Grantham Institute for Climate Change, Imperial College London)
#Sylvain Quoilin (Joint Research Center, EU Commission)
#Vignesh Sridharan (KTH) 
#Juan Camilo Herrera (University College London)
#Shai Hassid (University College London)
#Arnaud Koehl (University College London)
#Seán Collins (University College Cork)
#Charlie Heaps (Stockholm Environment Institute and Tufts University, Boston, MA)
#Moritz Schillinger (University of Basel)
#Rembrandt Koppelaar (Imperial College London)
#Simon Sawatzki (Technische Universität Berlin)
#Chris Davis (University of Groningen)
#Paul Deane (university College Cork)
#Ben Elliston (University of New South Wales, join via remote link)
#Maragatham (University College London)
#Grant Wilson (Sheffield)
#Angela Francis (Green Alliance) 
#Martin Glauer (OvGU Magdeburg) 
#Hannah Bloomfield (University of Reading) 
#Kaveri Iychettira (Delft University of Technology, KTH) 
#Mark Howells (KTH) 
#Fabrizio Fattori (University of Pavia) 
#Daniel Hdidouan (Arup)
#'''-- Registration is now closed; but you can add your name to the waiting list below. --'''

 Waiting list:

#...'''add your name here'''... Waiting list is open: just [[Special:RequestAccount|register with this wiki]] and click edit on this page. 

 [[Events|Back to events overview]]

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - London 2015

2015-09-14T17:20:20Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Practical information */

Welcome to the wiki page of the upcoming '''Third Workshop of the [http://openmod-initiative.org/ Open Energy Modelling Initiative]''', a grass-root organization of modellers from various European research institutes and universities. After two workshops in Berlin, we will be guest at Imperial College's [http://www.imperial.ac.uk/grantham Grantham Institute]. The workshop takes place September 10/11. As always, there is no registration fee. 

It will be a ''work''-shop in the sense of the word, with only little time devoted to plenary presentation and most time to hands-on parallel sessions (break-out groups). This is a wiki page that will be updated frequently, and all participants are invited to contribute.

'''See [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1KZW5drgvf22j8EqHxKLzw live-stream], and watch recordings of previous workshops.'''

== Background  ==

Energy models are widely used for policy advice and research. They serve to answer questions on energy policy, decarbonization, and transitions towards renewable energy sources. Yet, most energy models are black boxes – even to fellow researchers. This is what we want to change. We are a group of modellers from various universities and research institutes who want to promote open energy modelling. We believe that Open Source models and Open Data will advance knowledge and lead to better energy policies. Our mission is to enable Open Source energy modelling by providing a platform for collaboration as well as tools along the full value chain of energy economics and energy system models. That is why we founded the Open Energy Modelling Initiative (openmod initiative) just a year ago. You are welcome to join us for our next workshop!

After two extremely fruitful and encouraging workshops in Berlin ([[Founding workshop|Sept 2014]], [[2nd Open Energy Modelling Workshop|April 2015]]), we will have our next workshop in London with an even more international focus. The aim is to give researchers a chance to present their own contributions to the field of open energy modelling and data, as well as to provide a forum to exchange ideas and work on concrete projects of the openmod initiative and more generally in the field of open energy modelling and data.

 

 

== Practical information ==

[[File:The Royal School of Mines building on Imperial College London's South Kensington Campus.jpg|left|x225px|Imperial College, Royal School of Mines|alt=Imperial College, Royal School of Mines|link=]] 

Venue: London, Imperial College, Royal School of Mines Building Map: [https://goo.gl/maps/zZu3T https://goo.gl/maps/zZu3T] 

10/11 September 2015 Begin: Thursday (10 September) 10.00 End: Friday (11 September) 16:00 

Sign up: register on the Wiki, and add yourself to "participants" [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative Join our mailing list] to receive updates 

Fee: no registration fee, but you will need to cover your own food and lodging expenses.

Accommodation option: [http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/summeraccommodation Imperial College student halls of residence] can be booked as a bed and breakfast.

 

[[File:Grantham Institute Logo.jpg|none|300px|alt=Grantham Institute Logo.jpg]] 

The workshop is hosted by the [http://www.imperial.ac.uk/grantham Grantham Institute - Climate Change and the Environment].

== Programme ==

'''Thursday morning'''

''From 9:30            Coffee/tea available''

''10.00                   Start''

10.00 – 10.05      Welcome and important information (Stefan)

10.05 – 10.15      What is open-mod (Lion)

10.15 – 10.45      Introduction (everyone)

10.45 – 11.30      Model presentations 1 (plenary)

''11:30 – 11:45      Coffee break''

11.45 – 12.30      Model presentations 2 (plenary)

12.30 – 13.00      Introducing break-out groups (plenary)                 

''12.15 – 13.15      Lunch (on Imperial College campus)''

 

'''Thursday afternoon'''

13.15 – 15.00      Break-out groups 1 (parallel)

15.00 – 15.30      Reporting back (plenary)

''15.30 – 15.45      Coffee break''

15.45 – 16.15      Introducing break-out groups (plenary)

16.15 – 17.30      Break-out groups 2 (parallel)

17.30 – 18.00      Reporting back (plenary)

''18.00                   End of day''

''18:30                   Dinner and drinks at the [https://goo.gl/maps/1wJgS Builder's Arms] pub''

 

'''Friday morning'''

''9.00                      Start''

9.00  – 9.15          Summary of first day

9.15  – 9.30          Introducing break-out groups

9.30 – 11.00         Break-out groups 3 (parallel), 

''11.00'' – ''11.30       Coffee break''

11.30 – 12.00       Reporting back (plenary)

12.00 – 13.00       TechTalk ([http://neon-energie.de/Self-archiving.pdf Self-archiving], Sharing docs, [http://d3js.org/ D3JS], [https://zenodo.org/ Zenodo], [https://www3.nd.edu/~jeff/mathprog/ GLPK in a web browser], [http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.502751.de/dp1475.pdf Prices in MIPs])

''13.00 – 14.00       Lunch (on Imperial College campus)''

 

'''Friday afternoon'''

14.00 – 15.00      Wrap up, next workshop

''15.00                   End of workshop''

== Model presentations ==

The goal of this session is to get a flavor what people do: What questions are they interested in? What kind of models they apply? Which software tools do they use? How do they interact with the modelling community? This is not about presenting a research paper or discussing in-depth modelling methodology. Not more than 2-3 slides per presentation. 

#[http://nemo.ozlabs.org/ NEMO], an open source electricity modelling tool (Ben Elliston, remote) ([[:File:01 - Ben Elliston - Openmod-Elliston.pdf|slide]]) 
#The [http://www.energycommunity.org/ LEAP software system], a software tool for integrated energy planning and climate change mitigation scenario analysis (Charlie Heaps) ([[:File:06 - Charlie Heaps - Heaps, Charlie.pdf|slide)]]
#Tools for Energy Model Optimization and Analysis ([http://www.temoaproject.org/ Temoa]) (Joe DeCarolis) [[:File:02 - Joe DeCarolis - DeCarolis openmod 2015.pdf|(slide)]]
#The [http://www.scigrid.de/ SciGRID] model, a network model based on OpenStreetMap (Wided Medjroubi)[[:File:03 - wided medjroubi - Medjroubi Wided.pdf|(slide)]]
#CREST Demand Model v2.0 - An open-source high-resolution stochastic integrated thermal-electrical domestic demand simulation tool (Eoghan McKenna)[[:File:04 - Eoghan McKenna - Eoghan McKenna.pptx|(slide)]] 
#[https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs urbs] and [https://github.com/ojdo/rivus rivus], two energy system models based on Python (Johannes Dorfner) [[:File:05 - Johannes Dorfner - dorfner urbs-rivus.pdf|(slide)]]
#The European Power Market model [https://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/hirth/data/emma.pdf EMMA](Lion Hirth) ([[:File:07 - Lion Hirth - Lion - EMMA.pdf|slide]]) 
#The [http://open-power-system-data.org/ Open Power System Data] platform, a data hub for power system data (Clemens Gerbaulet) 
#Open Energy-Modelling Platform [http://www.rl-institut.de/en/research/optimised_systems/oemof oemof] (Guido Pleßmann) [[:File:09 - Guido Pleßmann - 2015 09 09 OpenEnergy Platform Guido.pptx|(slide)]] 
#UCED model based on high spatial resolution wind dataset for the UK power system (Thomas Spitz) [[:File:10 - Thomas Spitz - Thomas Spitz.pptx|(slide)]]
#[https://setis.ec.europa.eu/publications/jrc-setis-reports/dispa-set-20-unit-commitment-and-power-dispatch-model DispaSET] - Open-Source unit commitment and optimal dispatch model (Sylvain Quoilin, JRC) [[:File:11 - S Q - 150910 - OpenMod.pptx|(slide)]]

 

== Break-out-groups ==

In parallel sessions, we break out into smaller groups to get work done. On the last workshop, we started drafting an article on open modelling, re-worked the openmod-website, compiled an overview of applicable licenses, and developed recommendations for power plant identifiers, among other things.

All groups report back to the plenary and document their work.

 

=== Proposed break-out groups ===

 

Group work shall be documented. Klick on "Results" to open a Google document for documentation.

 

#Open weather data - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/188I99Euu1fQU_yplThq-mpjhBEhK-7cU6U5dA6IShpY/edit#heading=h.e1kj7nxfvoo7 Results] | [[Data|Data Wiki]]
#Renewables.ninja - [https://drive.google.com/open?id=1c2wXT8gFaWh5Mba_rFzyi6arpziJ4O1iPgJplN9ijrc Results]
#Use of models in government and industry - [https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wSVtEM3ea_xLPEbKjqfF8qlSugp4GrRl6VI-aUWiyPQ Results]
#Model [[Open Models|Factsheets]] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Rg6f9iGyVcW7o4SolGi_cstwa66tZiOMVQyzmT1PRsA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Open model testing - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zBdtjd7cVUdrIbK80afjXHNKHI864M2uwC5bLRI6SVo/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Demand side and storage - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Is7yTSm_b87N7qTea5NBiIHemRVA-CzW4raMPrmGyrY/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Wind potentials - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wi3rIjEU5emKm-rxGT3ED9DnSDdkEGZYD3zdYcebKFc/edit?usp=sharing Results] | [[Data|Data Wiki]]
#Hydro electricity - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xmZbse_Vy04i8q7Ws-fyZ1GdWlvDd3Bd58D0wOJTayI/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#The [http://open-power-system-data.org/ Open Power System Data] platform - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W0xZILYBypoEEPMVixA4TRti4TBZlSgpoLxiCXUwxV0/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Pros and cons of Open Source modelling - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/11pdFDq_VP0HjeD-j7C7mC4PkqzUgbrI2mxCkCJQ2slU/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Energy modeling for beginners
#OpenEnergy platform - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/16QY4U-DBXhZVxXnpugVkATDtp4SEMjXTgdnYX4CRKWA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Open Access publishing in energy modelling - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/18AAApjM9dgzdx9zmV70eAkBbAK1L98iIkj_4xKbaP5I/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Openmod article - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/127MpVdO8SV6zvLDjWogD48jmtWMkcNN4k54bm1cdS0Q/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Conference - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IGGQzKGV2BBkew47l4FPg_jEe-KvOCkJBleg0bOqInk/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CELP_XxPqxcE_002J7Qvwz6MAJBfyVvJtSt6GWgME-4/edit Funders best practice list] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/15cMucOXnfS1FRYqRfPJvvdwk7vwfANuW4ONtLu5JltA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#[[Data|Data sources]] hackathon - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IZ8AlXLPM2NsKtKfRJkEuoTr_Pn-0yMSGJMqc81ucgc/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#[http://openmod-initiative.org/ Openmod website] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1D0m1cy5dAWKyhaArOZwgrlEf4V-iJm-SFbLXEhtt1KA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Which license fits my model? - [[Choosing a license|Wiki]]
#Consultation “Marktstammdatenregister” [http://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/cln_1432/DE/Sachgebiete/ElektrizitaetundGas/Unternehmen_Institutionen/DatenaustauschundMonitoring/MaStR/Datendefinitionen/mastr_datendefinitionen-node.html BNetzA] - [[Marktstammdaten|Wiki]] 
#Load-flow modelling / grids
#<span id="docs-internal-guid-c3167b5a-b7d1-d1ea-d6b1-c4ddf6b8d62b" style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline">Python/Pyomo user group - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/16FF17l-Kw-6Ac4dZQiR2bSOazZibJBMAUsR9xHQ04BY/edit?usp=sharing Results]

 

Details are collected in this [https://docs.google.com/document/d/16Hs_JuK56fV9xUVqrWg3zAp-RepjSSA37mj5JfdCbSg/edit#heading=h.8xn9p9kiati3 Google document]. Please fill in missing spots. You are invited to add your name to the group you wish to coordinate or participate in. Expect more groups to be announced in site!

 

 

 

=== Break out groups from last workshop ===

Some of these groups may wish to continue based on the outcomes from the last workshop:

*Transparency checklist for scenarios (Felix) [[:File:Openmod-Transparency Energy Scenarios-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iWV6HNLcuU3NaTLQnIHYFAIIWEnt-Db-FCSg-SJTTyU/edit Results]
*Model fact sheets and website (Jörn) [[:File:Openmod-Website-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f0UFdvb4QM1VNAWYVdWpHnYIttl9n4GApNA-jITvwpI/edit Results]
*Which license fits my model? (Frauke) [[:File:Openmod whichLicenseFits-breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x8BH1Ev53d6MY8y72cXtbw24uCLk4vaHy2JtGW_iSws/edit Results]
*Open energy system data - concrete steps for collaboration (Simon S) [[:File:Openmod-Concrete steps for open data collaboration-Breakout.pdf|Openmod-Concrete steps for open data collaboration-Breakout.pdf]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/179Y1f9U_FuDMWQOJu8Q_1HbUZyzkH52YGws3h4ztk_A/edit# Results]
*Unique identifies for European power plants: how to we get there? (Chris) [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CL8jKuPkGOLKijcwqxtlTz8-Y0EEN0guGPjs6Vo3OcQ/edit?usp=sharing Results]
*Open energy system data - concrete steps for collaboration (Simon S) [[:File:Openmod-Concrete steps for open data collaboration-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/179Y1f9U_FuDMWQOJu8Q_1HbUZyzkH52YGws3h4ztk_A/edit# Results] 
*"Best practice" catalogue for funders (Lion) [[:File:Openmod-Best practice-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CELP_XxPqxcE_002J7Qvwz6MAJBfyVvJtSt6GWgME-4/edit Results] 
*Article on benefits and challenges of open source (Eva) [[:File:Openmod-Article-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/13ZzPHsHnakOjqlDvJphw3bvEVGILYGT7unL-FI4lCmw/edit# Results]
*Weather data [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1USIAqOmEPnP7dNmECOPHIvX9ZYjTU7_ySnluHI4vZfw/edit Results]
*establish a conference on (open) energy system modeling - concrete steps (Berit)

 

== Participants ==

Registration deadline: 10th August 2015

#Stefan Pfenninger (Imperial College London) 
#Lion Hirth (neon) 
#Ingmar Schlecht (University of Basel) 
#Iain Staffell (Imperial College Business School)
#Richard Green (Imperial College Business School)
#Johannes Dorfner (Technische Universität München)
#Clemens Gerbaulet (Technische Universität Berlin)
#Ed Sharp (University College London) 
#Catalina Spataru (University College London)
#Mark Barrett (University College London)
#Graeme Hawker ([[User:Graeme Hawker|profile]]) (University of Strathclyde)
#Warren Hicks (Reading University) 
#Alejandro Dávila (university of Groningen)
#Adrien Schwane (Forschungszentrum Jülich)
#Jörn Richstein (TU Delft, probably via remote link)
#Alice Gunn (University of Reading) 
#Abhishek Shivakumar (KTH) 
#[http://nworbmot.org/energy/publications.html Tom Brown] (from October: Frankfurt Institute of Advanced Studies) 
#Giorgio Castagneto Gissey (University College London)
#James Price (UCL)
#David Kleinhans (NEXT ENERGY)
#Wided Medjroubi (NEXT ENERGY)
#CarstenMatke (NEXT ENERGY)
#Daniel Drew (University of Reading)
#Francesco Gardumi (Politecnico di Milano)
#Daniel Crow (Imperial College) 
#Simon Tindemans (Imperial College)
#Guido Pleßmann (Reiner Lemoine Institut [someone else of the institute]) 
#Verena Viskovic (University College London)
#Daniel Huppmann (DIW Berlin) ([http://dergelbesalon.at/dh personal website])
#Martin Jahn (Europa-Universität Flensburg)
#Wolf-Dieter Bunke (Europa-Universität Flensburg)
#Joe DeCarolis (NC State University)
#Philip Sandwell (Imperial College London)
#Philip Sargent (DECC: Dept. of Energy and Climate Change)
#Frank Obermüller (ewi ER&S, Cologne)
#Koen van Dam (Imperial College London)
#Thomas Spitz (University of Edinburgh)
#Heidi Heinrichs (Forschungszentrum Jülich)
#Sheridan Few (Grantham Institute for Climate Change, Imperial College London)
#Florian Steiner (Grantham Institute for Climate Change, Imperial College London)
#Ajay Gambhir (Grantham Institute for Climate Change, Imperial College London)
#Sylvain Quoilin (Joint Research Center, EU Commission)
#Vignesh Sridharan (KTH) 
#Juan Camilo Herrera (University College London)
#Shai Hassid (University College London)
#Arnaud Koehl (University College London)
#Seán Collins (University College Cork)
#Charlie Heaps (Stockholm Environment Institute and Tufts University, Boston, MA)
#Moritz Schillinger (University of Basel)
#Rembrandt Koppelaar (Imperial College London)
#Simon Sawatzki (Technische Universität Berlin)
#Chris Davis (University of Groningen)
#Paul Deane (university College Cork)
#Ben Elliston (University of New South Wales, join via remote link)
#Maragatham (University College London)
#Grant Wilson (Sheffield)
#Angela Francis (Green Alliance) 
#Martin Glauer (OvGU Magdeburg) 
#Hannah Bloomfield (University of Reading) 
#Kaveri Iychettira (Delft University of Technology, KTH) 
#Mark Howells (KTH) 
#Fabrizio Fattori (University of Pavia) 
#Daniel Hdidouan (Arup)
#'''-- Registration is now closed; but you can add your name to the waiting list below. --'''

 Waiting list:

#...'''add your name here'''... Waiting list is open: just [[Special:RequestAccount|register with this wiki]] and click edit on this page. 

 [[Events|Back to events overview]]

Open Energy Modelling Workshop - London 2015

2015-09-14T17:20:12Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Programme */

Welcome to the wiki page of the upcoming '''Third Workshop of the [http://openmod-initiative.org/ Open Energy Modelling Initiative]''', a grass-root organization of modellers from various European research institutes and universities. After two workshops in Berlin, we will be guest at Imperial College's [http://www.imperial.ac.uk/grantham Grantham Institute]. The workshop takes place September 10/11. As always, there is no registration fee. 

It will be a ''work''-shop in the sense of the word, with only little time devoted to plenary presentation and most time to hands-on parallel sessions (break-out groups). This is a wiki page that will be updated frequently, and all participants are invited to contribute.

'''See [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1KZW5drgvf22j8EqHxKLzw live-stream], and watch recordings of previous workshops.'''

== Background  ==

Energy models are widely used for policy advice and research. They serve to answer questions on energy policy, decarbonization, and transitions towards renewable energy sources. Yet, most energy models are black boxes – even to fellow researchers. This is what we want to change. We are a group of modellers from various universities and research institutes who want to promote open energy modelling. We believe that Open Source models and Open Data will advance knowledge and lead to better energy policies. Our mission is to enable Open Source energy modelling by providing a platform for collaboration as well as tools along the full value chain of energy economics and energy system models. That is why we founded the Open Energy Modelling Initiative (openmod initiative) just a year ago. You are welcome to join us for our next workshop!

After two extremely fruitful and encouraging workshops in Berlin ([[Founding workshop|Sept 2014]], [[2nd Open Energy Modelling Workshop|April 2015]]), we will have our next workshop in London with an even more international focus. The aim is to give researchers a chance to present their own contributions to the field of open energy modelling and data, as well as to provide a forum to exchange ideas and work on concrete projects of the openmod initiative and more generally in the field of open energy modelling and data.

 

 

== Practical information ==

[[File:The Royal School of Mines building on Imperial College London's South Kensington Campus.jpg|left|x225px|Imperial College, Royal School of Mines|alt=Imperial College, Royal School of Mines|link=]] 

Venue: London, Imperial College, Royal School of Mines Building Map: [https://goo.gl/maps/zZu3T https://goo.gl/maps/zZu3T] 

10/11 September 2015 Begin: Thursday (10 September) 10.00 End: Friday (11 September) 16:00 

Sign up: register on the Wiki, and add yourself to "participants" [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openmod-initiative Join our mailing list] to receive updates 

Fee: no registration fee, but you will need to cover your own food and lodging expenses.

Accommodation option: [http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/summeraccommodation Imperial College student halls of residence] can be booked as a bed and breakfast.

 

[[File:Grantham Institute Logo.jpg|none|300px|alt=Grantham Institute Logo.jpg]] 

The workshop is hosted by the [http://www.imperial.ac.uk/grantham Grantham Institute - Climate Change and the Environment].

 

 

 

 

 

 

== Programme ==

'''Thursday morning'''

''From 9:30            Coffee/tea available''

''10.00                   Start''

10.00 – 10.05      Welcome and important information (Stefan)

10.05 – 10.15      What is open-mod (Lion)

10.15 – 10.45      Introduction (everyone)

10.45 – 11.30      Model presentations 1 (plenary)

''11:30 – 11:45      Coffee break''

11.45 – 12.30      Model presentations 2 (plenary)

12.30 – 13.00      Introducing break-out groups (plenary)                 

''12.15 – 13.15      Lunch (on Imperial College campus)''

 

'''Thursday afternoon'''

13.15 – 15.00      Break-out groups 1 (parallel)

15.00 – 15.30      Reporting back (plenary)

''15.30 – 15.45      Coffee break''

15.45 – 16.15      Introducing break-out groups (plenary)

16.15 – 17.30      Break-out groups 2 (parallel)

17.30 – 18.00      Reporting back (plenary)

''18.00                   End of day''

''18:30                   Dinner and drinks at the [https://goo.gl/maps/1wJgS Builder's Arms] pub''

 

'''Friday morning'''

''9.00                      Start''

9.00  – 9.15          Summary of first day

9.15  – 9.30          Introducing break-out groups

9.30 – 11.00         Break-out groups 3 (parallel), 

''11.00'' – ''11.30       Coffee break''

11.30 – 12.00       Reporting back (plenary)

12.00 – 13.00       TechTalk ([http://neon-energie.de/Self-archiving.pdf Self-archiving], Sharing docs, [http://d3js.org/ D3JS], [https://zenodo.org/ Zenodo], [https://www3.nd.edu/~jeff/mathprog/ GLPK in a web browser], [http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.502751.de/dp1475.pdf Prices in MIPs])

''13.00 – 14.00       Lunch (on Imperial College campus)''

 

'''Friday afternoon'''

14.00 – 15.00      Wrap up, next workshop

''15.00                   End of workshop''

== Model presentations ==

The goal of this session is to get a flavor what people do: What questions are they interested in? What kind of models they apply? Which software tools do they use? How do they interact with the modelling community? This is not about presenting a research paper or discussing in-depth modelling methodology. Not more than 2-3 slides per presentation. 

#[http://nemo.ozlabs.org/ NEMO], an open source electricity modelling tool (Ben Elliston, remote) ([[:File:01 - Ben Elliston - Openmod-Elliston.pdf|slide]]) 
#The [http://www.energycommunity.org/ LEAP software system], a software tool for integrated energy planning and climate change mitigation scenario analysis (Charlie Heaps) ([[:File:06 - Charlie Heaps - Heaps, Charlie.pdf|slide)]]
#Tools for Energy Model Optimization and Analysis ([http://www.temoaproject.org/ Temoa]) (Joe DeCarolis) [[:File:02 - Joe DeCarolis - DeCarolis openmod 2015.pdf|(slide)]]
#The [http://www.scigrid.de/ SciGRID] model, a network model based on OpenStreetMap (Wided Medjroubi)[[:File:03 - wided medjroubi - Medjroubi Wided.pdf|(slide)]]
#CREST Demand Model v2.0 - An open-source high-resolution stochastic integrated thermal-electrical domestic demand simulation tool (Eoghan McKenna)[[:File:04 - Eoghan McKenna - Eoghan McKenna.pptx|(slide)]] 
#[https://github.com/tum-ens/urbs urbs] and [https://github.com/ojdo/rivus rivus], two energy system models based on Python (Johannes Dorfner) [[:File:05 - Johannes Dorfner - dorfner urbs-rivus.pdf|(slide)]]
#The European Power Market model [https://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/hirth/data/emma.pdf EMMA](Lion Hirth) ([[:File:07 - Lion Hirth - Lion - EMMA.pdf|slide]]) 
#The [http://open-power-system-data.org/ Open Power System Data] platform, a data hub for power system data (Clemens Gerbaulet) 
#Open Energy-Modelling Platform [http://www.rl-institut.de/en/research/optimised_systems/oemof oemof] (Guido Pleßmann) [[:File:09 - Guido Pleßmann - 2015 09 09 OpenEnergy Platform Guido.pptx|(slide)]] 
#UCED model based on high spatial resolution wind dataset for the UK power system (Thomas Spitz) [[:File:10 - Thomas Spitz - Thomas Spitz.pptx|(slide)]]
#[https://setis.ec.europa.eu/publications/jrc-setis-reports/dispa-set-20-unit-commitment-and-power-dispatch-model DispaSET] - Open-Source unit commitment and optimal dispatch model (Sylvain Quoilin, JRC) [[:File:11 - S Q - 150910 - OpenMod.pptx|(slide)]]

 

== Break-out-groups ==

In parallel sessions, we break out into smaller groups to get work done. On the last workshop, we started drafting an article on open modelling, re-worked the openmod-website, compiled an overview of applicable licenses, and developed recommendations for power plant identifiers, among other things.

All groups report back to the plenary and document their work.

 

=== Proposed break-out groups ===

 

Group work shall be documented. Klick on "Results" to open a Google document for documentation.

 

#Open weather data - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/188I99Euu1fQU_yplThq-mpjhBEhK-7cU6U5dA6IShpY/edit#heading=h.e1kj7nxfvoo7 Results] | [[Data|Data Wiki]]
#Renewables.ninja - [https://drive.google.com/open?id=1c2wXT8gFaWh5Mba_rFzyi6arpziJ4O1iPgJplN9ijrc Results]
#Use of models in government and industry - [https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wSVtEM3ea_xLPEbKjqfF8qlSugp4GrRl6VI-aUWiyPQ Results]
#Model [[Open Models|Factsheets]] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Rg6f9iGyVcW7o4SolGi_cstwa66tZiOMVQyzmT1PRsA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Open model testing - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zBdtjd7cVUdrIbK80afjXHNKHI864M2uwC5bLRI6SVo/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Demand side and storage - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Is7yTSm_b87N7qTea5NBiIHemRVA-CzW4raMPrmGyrY/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Wind potentials - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wi3rIjEU5emKm-rxGT3ED9DnSDdkEGZYD3zdYcebKFc/edit?usp=sharing Results] | [[Data|Data Wiki]]
#Hydro electricity - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xmZbse_Vy04i8q7Ws-fyZ1GdWlvDd3Bd58D0wOJTayI/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#The [http://open-power-system-data.org/ Open Power System Data] platform - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W0xZILYBypoEEPMVixA4TRti4TBZlSgpoLxiCXUwxV0/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Pros and cons of Open Source modelling - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/11pdFDq_VP0HjeD-j7C7mC4PkqzUgbrI2mxCkCJQ2slU/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Energy modeling for beginners
#OpenEnergy platform - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/16QY4U-DBXhZVxXnpugVkATDtp4SEMjXTgdnYX4CRKWA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Open Access publishing in energy modelling - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/18AAApjM9dgzdx9zmV70eAkBbAK1L98iIkj_4xKbaP5I/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Openmod article - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/127MpVdO8SV6zvLDjWogD48jmtWMkcNN4k54bm1cdS0Q/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Conference - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IGGQzKGV2BBkew47l4FPg_jEe-KvOCkJBleg0bOqInk/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CELP_XxPqxcE_002J7Qvwz6MAJBfyVvJtSt6GWgME-4/edit Funders best practice list] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/15cMucOXnfS1FRYqRfPJvvdwk7vwfANuW4ONtLu5JltA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#[[Data|Data sources]] hackathon - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IZ8AlXLPM2NsKtKfRJkEuoTr_Pn-0yMSGJMqc81ucgc/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#[http://openmod-initiative.org/ Openmod website] - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1D0m1cy5dAWKyhaArOZwgrlEf4V-iJm-SFbLXEhtt1KA/edit?usp=sharing Results]
#Which license fits my model? - [[Choosing a license|Wiki]]
#Consultation “Marktstammdatenregister” [http://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/cln_1432/DE/Sachgebiete/ElektrizitaetundGas/Unternehmen_Institutionen/DatenaustauschundMonitoring/MaStR/Datendefinitionen/mastr_datendefinitionen-node.html BNetzA] - [[Marktstammdaten|Wiki]] 
#Load-flow modelling / grids
#<span id="docs-internal-guid-c3167b5a-b7d1-d1ea-d6b1-c4ddf6b8d62b" style="font-size:14.666666666666666px; font-family:Arial; color:#000000; background-color:transparent; font-weight:400; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; text-decoration:none; vertical-align:baseline">Python/Pyomo user group - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/16FF17l-Kw-6Ac4dZQiR2bSOazZibJBMAUsR9xHQ04BY/edit?usp=sharing Results]

 

Details are collected in this [https://docs.google.com/document/d/16Hs_JuK56fV9xUVqrWg3zAp-RepjSSA37mj5JfdCbSg/edit#heading=h.8xn9p9kiati3 Google document]. Please fill in missing spots. You are invited to add your name to the group you wish to coordinate or participate in. Expect more groups to be announced in site!

 

 

 

=== Break out groups from last workshop ===

Some of these groups may wish to continue based on the outcomes from the last workshop:

*Transparency checklist for scenarios (Felix) [[:File:Openmod-Transparency Energy Scenarios-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iWV6HNLcuU3NaTLQnIHYFAIIWEnt-Db-FCSg-SJTTyU/edit Results]
*Model fact sheets and website (Jörn) [[:File:Openmod-Website-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f0UFdvb4QM1VNAWYVdWpHnYIttl9n4GApNA-jITvwpI/edit Results]
*Which license fits my model? (Frauke) [[:File:Openmod whichLicenseFits-breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x8BH1Ev53d6MY8y72cXtbw24uCLk4vaHy2JtGW_iSws/edit Results]
*Open energy system data - concrete steps for collaboration (Simon S) [[:File:Openmod-Concrete steps for open data collaboration-Breakout.pdf|Openmod-Concrete steps for open data collaboration-Breakout.pdf]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/179Y1f9U_FuDMWQOJu8Q_1HbUZyzkH52YGws3h4ztk_A/edit# Results]
*Unique identifies for European power plants: how to we get there? (Chris) [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CL8jKuPkGOLKijcwqxtlTz8-Y0EEN0guGPjs6Vo3OcQ/edit?usp=sharing Results]
*Open energy system data - concrete steps for collaboration (Simon S) [[:File:Openmod-Concrete steps for open data collaboration-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/179Y1f9U_FuDMWQOJu8Q_1HbUZyzkH52YGws3h4ztk_A/edit# Results] 
*"Best practice" catalogue for funders (Lion) [[:File:Openmod-Best practice-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CELP_XxPqxcE_002J7Qvwz6MAJBfyVvJtSt6GWgME-4/edit Results] 
*Article on benefits and challenges of open source (Eva) [[:File:Openmod-Article-Breakout.pdf|Kickoff slide]] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/13ZzPHsHnakOjqlDvJphw3bvEVGILYGT7unL-FI4lCmw/edit# Results]
*Weather data [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1USIAqOmEPnP7dNmECOPHIvX9ZYjTU7_ySnluHI4vZfw/edit Results]
*establish a conference on (open) energy system modeling - concrete steps (Berit)

 

== Participants ==

Registration deadline: 10th August 2015

#Stefan Pfenninger (Imperial College London) 
#Lion Hirth (neon) 
#Ingmar Schlecht (University of Basel) 
#Iain Staffell (Imperial College Business School)
#Richard Green (Imperial College Business School)
#Johannes Dorfner (Technische Universität München)
#Clemens Gerbaulet (Technische Universität Berlin)
#Ed Sharp (University College London) 
#Catalina Spataru (University College London)
#Mark Barrett (University College London)
#Graeme Hawker ([[User:Graeme Hawker|profile]]) (University of Strathclyde)
#Warren Hicks (Reading University) 
#Alejandro Dávila (university of Groningen)
#Adrien Schwane (Forschungszentrum Jülich)
#Jörn Richstein (TU Delft, probably via remote link)
#Alice Gunn (University of Reading) 
#Abhishek Shivakumar (KTH) 
#[http://nworbmot.org/energy/publications.html Tom Brown] (from October: Frankfurt Institute of Advanced Studies) 
#Giorgio Castagneto Gissey (University College London)
#James Price (UCL)
#David Kleinhans (NEXT ENERGY)
#Wided Medjroubi (NEXT ENERGY)
#CarstenMatke (NEXT ENERGY)
#Daniel Drew (University of Reading)
#Francesco Gardumi (Politecnico di Milano)
#Daniel Crow (Imperial College) 
#Simon Tindemans (Imperial College)
#Guido Pleßmann (Reiner Lemoine Institut [someone else of the institute]) 
#Verena Viskovic (University College London)
#Daniel Huppmann (DIW Berlin) ([http://dergelbesalon.at/dh personal website])
#Martin Jahn (Europa-Universität Flensburg)
#Wolf-Dieter Bunke (Europa-Universität Flensburg)
#Joe DeCarolis (NC State University)
#Philip Sandwell (Imperial College London)
#Philip Sargent (DECC: Dept. of Energy and Climate Change)
#Frank Obermüller (ewi ER&S, Cologne)
#Koen van Dam (Imperial College London)
#Thomas Spitz (University of Edinburgh)
#Heidi Heinrichs (Forschungszentrum Jülich)
#Sheridan Few (Grantham Institute for Climate Change, Imperial College London)
#Florian Steiner (Grantham Institute for Climate Change, Imperial College London)
#Ajay Gambhir (Grantham Institute for Climate Change, Imperial College London)
#Sylvain Quoilin (Joint Research Center, EU Commission)
#Vignesh Sridharan (KTH) 
#Juan Camilo Herrera (University College London)
#Shai Hassid (University College London)
#Arnaud Koehl (University College London)
#Seán Collins (University College Cork)
#Charlie Heaps (Stockholm Environment Institute and Tufts University, Boston, MA)
#Moritz Schillinger (University of Basel)
#Rembrandt Koppelaar (Imperial College London)
#Simon Sawatzki (Technische Universität Berlin)
#Chris Davis (University of Groningen)
#Paul Deane (university College Cork)
#Ben Elliston (University of New South Wales, join via remote link)
#Maragatham (University College London)
#Grant Wilson (Sheffield)
#Angela Francis (Green Alliance) 
#Martin Glauer (OvGU Magdeburg) 
#Hannah Bloomfield (University of Reading) 
#Kaveri Iychettira (Delft University of Technology, KTH) 
#Mark Howells (KTH) 
#Fabrizio Fattori (University of Pavia) 
#Daniel Hdidouan (Arup)
#'''-- Registration is now closed; but you can add your name to the waiting list below. --'''

 Waiting list:

#...'''add your name here'''... Waiting list is open: just [[Special:RequestAccount|register with this wiki]] and click edit on this page. 

 [[Events|Back to events overview]]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T17:16:33Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* At what point of time to choose/can I change license? */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

The following sections elaborate on both options for each type of work: code, data, and other.
 

== Code ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives a more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

The go-to solution for data licenses comes from the [http://opendatacommons.org/ Open Data Commons] that have created the following three licenses, and a nice [http://opendatacommons.org/guide/ 2-minute guide] on the why and how of data licensing.

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* The [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By)] (analog to CC BY) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation. It basically only to mention the contributors to the original database
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)] is even more permissive and does neither require attribution nor force a derived work under any specific license conditions.

*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been reworked since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published. First, the two "free licenses" are presented:

* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY], short for attributions ("by" whom was the work created?), requests to name the source when sharing the work or a derived work.
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC BY-SA] is similar to the GPL as it requires any derived works to be published under a "compatible" (easiest: the same) license. It is therefore the license used by Wikipedia.

Only the previous two licenses qualify as "free" licenses, as they do not restrict, what a user may do with the licensed work.

* The non-commercial (NC) option allows to prohibit any "commercial" usage of one's work. However, it is notoriously hard to define ''what exactly is'' a commercial activity. This problem is explained in great detailed in the brochure [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module "non-commercial use only"]. Anyway, the two resulting licenses are consequently called [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ CC BY-NC] and, with the share-alike option, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ CC BY-NC-SA].
* If you do not want any changes or improvements to your work to be shared or redistributed, the "no derivatives" (ND) is available. Its main use is by musicians that only want their music to be shared by listeners, but not allowing remixes or cover version. The resulting licenses are [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ CC BY-ND] or, by combining it with the NC tag, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CC BY-NC-ND].

For inspiration, the Creative Commons homepage also lists [https://creativecommons.org/examples a host of example projects licensed under all different licenses] to give an impression which situation triggered which decision by the presented individuals.
 

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements FAQ on contributor agreements on opensource.org], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements Civic Commons article on contributor agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T17:15:34Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Software */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

The following sections elaborate on both options for each type of work: code, data, and other.
 

== Code ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives a more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

The go-to solution for data licenses comes from the [http://opendatacommons.org/ Open Data Commons] that have created the following three licenses, and a nice [http://opendatacommons.org/guide/ 2-minute guide] on the why and how of data licensing.

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* The [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By)] (analog to CC BY) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation. It basically only to mention the contributors to the original database
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)] is even more permissive and does neither require attribution nor force a derived work under any specific license conditions.

*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been reworked since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published. First, the two "free licenses" are presented:

* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY], short for attributions ("by" whom was the work created?), requests to name the source when sharing the work or a derived work.
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC BY-SA] is similar to the GPL as it requires any derived works to be published under a "compatible" (easiest: the same) license. It is therefore the license used by Wikipedia.

Only the previous two licenses qualify as "free" licenses, as they do not restrict, what a user may do with the licensed work.

* The non-commercial (NC) option allows to prohibit any "commercial" usage of one's work. However, it is notoriously hard to define ''what exactly is'' a commercial activity. This problem is explained in great detailed in the brochure [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module "non-commercial use only"]. Anyway, the two resulting licenses are consequently called [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ CC BY-NC] and, with the share-alike option, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ CC BY-NC-SA].
* If you do not want any changes or improvements to your work to be shared or redistributed, the "no derivatives" (ND) is available. Its main use is by musicians that only want their music to be shared by listeners, but not allowing remixes or cover version. The resulting licenses are [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ CC BY-ND] or, by combining it with the NC tag, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CC BY-NC-ND].

For inspiration, the Creative Commons homepage also lists [https://creativecommons.org/examples a host of example projects licensed under all different licenses] to give an impression which situation triggered which decision by the presented individuals.
 

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T17:15:16Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Picking a license */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

The following sections elaborate on both options for each type of work: code, data, and other.
 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives a more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

The go-to solution for data licenses comes from the [http://opendatacommons.org/ Open Data Commons] that have created the following three licenses, and a nice [http://opendatacommons.org/guide/ 2-minute guide] on the why and how of data licensing.

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* The [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By)] (analog to CC BY) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation. It basically only to mention the contributors to the original database
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)] is even more permissive and does neither require attribution nor force a derived work under any specific license conditions.

*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been reworked since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published. First, the two "free licenses" are presented:

* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY], short for attributions ("by" whom was the work created?), requests to name the source when sharing the work or a derived work.
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC BY-SA] is similar to the GPL as it requires any derived works to be published under a "compatible" (easiest: the same) license. It is therefore the license used by Wikipedia.

Only the previous two licenses qualify as "free" licenses, as they do not restrict, what a user may do with the licensed work.

* The non-commercial (NC) option allows to prohibit any "commercial" usage of one's work. However, it is notoriously hard to define ''what exactly is'' a commercial activity. This problem is explained in great detailed in the brochure [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module "non-commercial use only"]. Anyway, the two resulting licenses are consequently called [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ CC BY-NC] and, with the share-alike option, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ CC BY-NC-SA].
* If you do not want any changes or improvements to your work to be shared or redistributed, the "no derivatives" (ND) is available. Its main use is by musicians that only want their music to be shared by listeners, but not allowing remixes or cover version. The resulting licenses are [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ CC BY-ND] or, by combining it with the NC tag, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CC BY-NC-ND].

For inspiration, the Creative Commons homepage also lists [https://creativecommons.org/examples a host of example projects licensed under all different licenses] to give an impression which situation triggered which decision by the presented individuals.
 

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T17:14:07Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Other */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives a more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

The go-to solution for data licenses comes from the [http://opendatacommons.org/ Open Data Commons] that have created the following three licenses, and a nice [http://opendatacommons.org/guide/ 2-minute guide] on the why and how of data licensing.

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* The [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By)] (analog to CC BY) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation. It basically only to mention the contributors to the original database
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)] is even more permissive and does neither require attribution nor force a derived work under any specific license conditions.

*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been reworked since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published. First, the two "free licenses" are presented:

* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY], short for attributions ("by" whom was the work created?), requests to name the source when sharing the work or a derived work.
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC BY-SA] is similar to the GPL as it requires any derived works to be published under a "compatible" (easiest: the same) license. It is therefore the license used by Wikipedia.

Only the previous two licenses qualify as "free" licenses, as they do not restrict, what a user may do with the licensed work.

* The non-commercial (NC) option allows to prohibit any "commercial" usage of one's work. However, it is notoriously hard to define ''what exactly is'' a commercial activity. This problem is explained in great detailed in the brochure [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module "non-commercial use only"]. Anyway, the two resulting licenses are consequently called [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ CC BY-NC] and, with the share-alike option, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ CC BY-NC-SA].
* If you do not want any changes or improvements to your work to be shared or redistributed, the "no derivatives" (ND) is available. Its main use is by musicians that only want their music to be shared by listeners, but not allowing remixes or cover version. The resulting licenses are [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ CC BY-ND] or, by combining it with the NC tag, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CC BY-NC-ND].

For inspiration, the Creative Commons homepage also lists [https://creativecommons.org/examples a host of example projects licensed under all different licenses] to give an impression which situation triggered which decision by the presented individuals.
 

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T15:11:25Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Other */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives a more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

The go-to solution for data licenses comes from the [http://opendatacommons.org/ Open Data Commons] that have created the following three licenses, and a nice [http://opendatacommons.org/guide/ 2-minute guide] on the why and how of data licensing.

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* The [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By)] (analog to CC BY) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation. It basically only to mention the contributors to the original database
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)] is even more permissive and does neither require attribution nor force a derived work under any specific license conditions.

*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been reworked since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published. First, the two "free licenses" are presented:

* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY], short for attributions ("by" whom i
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC BY-SA] is similar to the GPL as it requires any derived works to be published under a "compatible" (easiest: the same) license. It is therefore the license used by Wikipedia.

Only the previous two licenses qualify as "free" licenses, as they do not restrict, what a user may do with the licensed work.

* The non-commercial (NC) option allows to prohibit any "commercial" usage of one's work. However, it is notoriously hard to define ''what exactly is'' a commercial activity. This problem is explained in great detailed in the brochure [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module "non-commercial use only"]. Anyway, the two resulting licenses are consequently called [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ CC BY-NC] and, with the share-alike option, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ CC BY-NC-SA].
* If you do not want any changes or improvements to your work to be shared or redistributed, the "no derivatives" (ND) is available. Its main use is by musicians that only want their music to be shared by listeners, but not allowing remixes or cover version. The resulting licenses are [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ CC BY-ND] or, by combining it with the NC tag, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CC BY-NC-ND].

For inspiration, the Creative Commons homepage also lists [https://creativecommons.org/examples a host of example projects licensed under all different licenses] to give an impression which situation triggered which decision by the presented individuals.
 

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T15:10:06Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Data */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives a more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

The go-to solution for data licenses comes from the [http://opendatacommons.org/ Open Data Commons] that have created the following three licenses, and a nice [http://opendatacommons.org/guide/ 2-minute guide] on the why and how of data licensing.

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* The [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By)] (analog to CC BY) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation. It basically only to mention the contributors to the original database
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)] is even more permissive and does neither require attribution nor force a derived work under any specific license conditions.

*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been reworked since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published. First, the two "free licenses" are presented:

* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY], short for attributions ("by" whom i
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC BY-SA] is similar to the GPL as it requires any derived works to be published under a "compatible" (easiest: the same) license. It is therefore the license used by Wikipedia.

Only the previous two licenses qualify as "free" licenses, as they do not restrict, what a user may do with the licensed work.

* The non-commercial (NC) option allows to prohibit any "commercial" usage of one's work. However, it is notoriously hard to define ''what exactly is'' a commercial activity. This problem is explained in great detailed in the brochure [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module "non-commercial use only"]. Anyway, the two resulting licenses are consequently called [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ CC BY-NC] and, with the share-alike option, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ CC BY-NC-SA].
* If you do not want any changes or improvements to your work to be shared or redistributed, the "no derivatives" (ND) is available. Its main use is by musicians that only want their music to be shared by listeners, but not allowing remixes or cover version. The resulting licenses are [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ CC BY-ND] or, by combining it with the NC tag, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CC BY-NC-ND].

 

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T15:03:23Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Software */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives a more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
*Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published. First, the two "free licenses" are presented:

* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY], short for attributions ("by" whom i
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC BY-SA] is similar to the GPL as it requires any derived works to be published under a "compatible" (easiest: the same) license. It is therefore the license used by Wikipedia.

Only the previous two licenses qualify as "free" licenses, as they do not restrict, what a user may do with the licensed work.

* The non-commercial (NC) option allows to prohibit any "commercial" usage of one's work. However, it is notoriously hard to define ''what exactly is'' a commercial activity. This problem is explained in great detailed in the brochure [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module "non-commercial use only"]. Anyway, the two resulting licenses are consequently called [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ CC BY-NC] and, with the share-alike option, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ CC BY-NC-SA].
* If you do not want any changes or improvements to your work to be shared or redistributed, the "no derivatives" (ND) is available. Its main use is by musicians that only want their music to be shared by listeners, but not allowing remixes or cover version. The resulting licenses are [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ CC BY-ND] or, by combining it with the NC tag, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CC BY-NC-ND].

 

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T15:02:46Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
*Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published. First, the two "free licenses" are presented:

* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY], short for attributions ("by" whom i
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC BY-SA] is similar to the GPL as it requires any derived works to be published under a "compatible" (easiest: the same) license. It is therefore the license used by Wikipedia.

Only the previous two licenses qualify as "free" licenses, as they do not restrict, what a user may do with the licensed work.

* The non-commercial (NC) option allows to prohibit any "commercial" usage of one's work. However, it is notoriously hard to define ''what exactly is'' a commercial activity. This problem is explained in great detailed in the brochure [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module "non-commercial use only"]. Anyway, the two resulting licenses are consequently called [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ CC BY-NC] and, with the share-alike option, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ CC BY-NC-SA].
* If you do not want any changes or improvements to your work to be shared or redistributed, the "no derivatives" (ND) is available. Its main use is by musicians that only want their music to be shared by listeners, but not allowing remixes or cover version. The resulting licenses are [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ CC BY-ND] or, by combining it with the NC tag, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CC BY-NC-ND].

 

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T15:02:13Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Other */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
*Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published. First, the two "free licenses" are presented:

* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY], short for attributions ("by" whom i
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ CC BY-SA] is similar to the GPL as it requires any derived works to be published under a "compatible" (easiest: the same) license. It is therefore the license used by Wikipedia.

Only the previous two licenses qualify as "free" licenses, as they do not restrict, what a user may do with the licensed work.

* The non-commercial (NC) option allows to prohibit any "commercial" usage of one's work. However, it is notoriously hard to define ''what exactly is'' a commercial activity. This problem is explained in great detailed in the brochure [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module "non-commercial use only"]. Anyway, the two resulting licenses are consequently called [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ CC BY-NC] and, with the share-alike option, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ CC BY-NC-SA].
* If you do not want any changes or improvements to your work to be shared or redistributed, the "no derivatives" (ND) is available. Its main use is by musicians that only want their music to be shared by listeners, but not allowing remixes or cover version. The resulting licenses are [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ CC BY-ND] or, by combining it with the NC tag, [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ CC BY-NC-ND].

 

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T14:25:51Z

Johannes Dorfner:

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
*Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

 

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T14:25:10Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Copyleft licenses */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

== Data ==

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
*Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T14:24:58Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Permissive licenses */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

 

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

== Data ==

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
*Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T14:24:38Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Copyleft licenses */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

More information, geared towards the use of copyleft licenses for one's code, can be found in the article [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations How to choose a license for your own work] on [https://www.gnu.org/ gnu.org].

 

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
*Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T14:16:40Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Picking a license */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

With these two distinctions (type of work, type of license), the following decision matrix can be drawn:

{| style="width: 100%; border:1px black solid; background:#def"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

 

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
*The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

 

== Data ==

*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
*Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
*[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
*[http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T14:14:43Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Picking a license */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

At the most basic level, one must decide on whether one wants to use a copyleft license or a more permissive license. While copyleft assures that code changes by any future contributors must stay public, permissive licenses only require attribution in derived works.

{| width="100%" style="border:1px black solid;background:#fafaee" cell-padding="1"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| ODbL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

* GPL: the basic GPL license
* LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
* AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

== Data ==

* [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
* [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
* [http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T14:08:39Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* At what point of time to choose/can I change license? */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

{| width="755" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" height="69"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| OBDL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.
 
=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

* GPL: the basic GPL license
* LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
* AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

== Data ==

* [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
* [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
* [http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T13:45:05Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* At what point of time to choose/can I change license? */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

{| width="755" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" height="69"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| OBDL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.
 
=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

* GPL: the basic GPL license
* LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
* AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

== Data ==

* [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
* [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
* [http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence for your project.

''Can I change the licence?'' The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Related question on StackOverflow: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license What happens when an open source project changes its license?]

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

Open Question: Is it better to start with the most restrictive copyleft license (GNU GPL) and possibly relax licensing arrangements at a later date or for specific people/institutions?

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T13:43:25Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Data */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

{| width="755" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" height="69"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| OBDL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.
 
=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

* GPL: the basic GPL license
* LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
* AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

== Data ==

* [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)]: this license is used by OpenStretMap
* Open Data Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author
* [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)]
* [http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] licenses have been improved since version 2 to include provisions which make them suitable for databases and data sets as well. Please refer to the section "Other" below for their properties.

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence

Can I change the licence: The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Stackoverflow question: www.stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

Open Question: Is it better to start with the most restrictive copyleft license (GNU GPL) and possibly relax licensing arrangements at a later date or for specific people/institutions?

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T13:37:52Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Permissive licenses */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

{| width="755" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" height="69"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| OBDL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.
 
=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

* GPL: the basic GPL license
* LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
* AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

The site [http://choosealicense.com/ choosealicense.com] has a great three-column summary of the differences between the major open source licenses. Summary from their explanations (links to their license description pages):

* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit MIT] license is a simple permissive license
* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/ Apache License] adds an additional term explicitely granting code contributor's patent rights to the user of such code.
* The [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-2-clause/ BSD] license, or its newer even shorter successor [http://choosealicense.com/licenses/isc/ ISC] is virtually identical to MIT, but worded shorter.

One important aspect of all these licenses is the liability clause. It prohibits any code user from holding the code producer liable for any damages caused by using the software code.

== Data ==

NOTE: This part is lacking a text describing the ODbL license ([http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/]) and its advantages/disadvantages compared with the Creative Commons licenses.

*Creative Commons licenses
**[http://creativecommons.org/ http://creativecommons.org/]

*Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)
**Places no restrictions at all on the use of the licensed entities
**Source: [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/]

*OSM-Licence: Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)
**[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/]

*There is a [https://www.govdata.de/lizenzen Datenlizenz Deutschland] used by govdata.de, but there are no real differences to Creative Commons except that a German data portal wanted to have a German licence which is checked by German lawers
**Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence

Can I change the licence: The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Stackoverflow question: www.stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

Open Question: Is it better to start with the most restrictive copyleft license (GNU GPL) and possibly relax licensing arrangements at a later date or for specific people/institutions?

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T13:25:29Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Strong copyleft licenses */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

{| width="755" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" height="69"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| OBDL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.
 
=== Copyleft licenses ===

Developers who use GPL code must publish the source code available they share or sell an application built upon it. In this case, the source code must also contain any changes the developers may have made. If GPL code is used but not shared or sold, the code is not required to be made available and any changes may remain private. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in "non-free" software. The GPL licenses are:

* GPL: the basic GPL license
* LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.
* AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. It closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

 

== Data ==

NOTE: This part is lacking a text describing the ODbL license ([http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/]) and its advantages/disadvantages compared with the Creative Commons licenses.

*Creative Commons licenses
**[http://creativecommons.org/ http://creativecommons.org/]

*Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)
**Places no restrictions at all on the use of the licensed entities
**Source: [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/]

*OSM-Licence: Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)
**[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/]

*There is a [https://www.govdata.de/lizenzen Datenlizenz Deutschland] used by govdata.de, but there are no real differences to Creative Commons except that a German data portal wanted to have a German licence which is checked by German lawers
**Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence

Can I change the licence: The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Stackoverflow question: www.stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

Open Question: Is it better to start with the most restrictive copyleft license (GNU GPL) and possibly relax licensing arrangements at a later date or for specific people/institutions?

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T13:18:16Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Picking a license */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (documentation, reports, figures). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

{| width="755" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" height="69"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Copyleft
| GPL licenses
| OBDL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive
| MIT, BSD, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

 

== Software ==

The following minimal questions can give a guideline whether one should choose a copyleft or a permissive license for a project. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license Free software licenses] gives A more in-depth overview on both types and their properties.

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a '''closed-source''' commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to '''force '''users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.
 
=== Strong copyleft licenses ===

Strong copyleft licenses, on the other hand, ensure that improvements are always shared under a "compatible" license as well. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in “non-free” software. The GPL licenses are:

*GPL: the basic GPL license
*AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users
*LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

 

== Data ==

NOTE: This part is lacking a text describing the ODbL license ([http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/]) and its advantages/disadvantages compared with the Creative Commons licenses.

*Creative Commons licenses
**[http://creativecommons.org/ http://creativecommons.org/]

*Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)
**Places no restrictions at all on the use of the licensed entities
**Source: [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/]

*OSM-Licence: Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)
**[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/]

*There is a [https://www.govdata.de/lizenzen Datenlizenz Deutschland] used by govdata.de, but there are no real differences to Creative Commons except that a German data portal wanted to have a German licence which is checked by German lawers
**Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence

Can I change the licence: The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Stackoverflow question: www.stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

Open Question: Is it better to start with the most restrictive copyleft license (GNU GPL) and possibly relax licensing arrangements at a later date or for specific people/institutions?

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]

Choosing a license

2015-09-14T13:12:12Z

Johannes Dorfner: /* Why should you pick a license? */

= Why should you pick a license? =

In other words, why not just put code online without a license? A license clarifies the conditions under which your code can be re-used. In absence of a license, the author still retains copyright, and the conditions under which the code can be used are unclear. A sentence like "feel free to use this code" does not improve the situation, because it does not clarify to what extent any possible user should "feel free" to use it. Standard licenses provide pre-defined sets of standard conditions, which both providers and users only have to understand once, and then immediately can recognise/categorise later.

Also see "Why is an open-source licence useful?" on the Software Sustainability's [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence Choosing an open-source licence page] article.

= Picking a license =

The most common licenses for a given artifact can be determined by its type: code, data, or any other generic digital "creative work" (text, audio, image, video). ''For any given project, its components can be licensed independently by type.''

{| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" style="width: 100%"
|-
! scope="col" | Code
! scope="col" | Data
! scope="col" | Other
|-
| Strong: GPL, AGPL
| OBDL
| CC-BY-SA
|-
| Permissive: MIT, Apache
| ODC-BY
| CC-BY
|}

*Code: look at software licenses
*Data: look at data licenses
*Other (reports, documentation, figures): look at Creative Commons licenses

== Software ==

*Are you ok with your code becoming part of a closed-source commercial software product?
**No: GPL
**Yes: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache)

*Do you want to force users to publish their improvements to your software, or to software they develop based on your software, under the same licence?
**No: permissive licenses (MIT/BSD/Apache). This makes the code more broadly usable, but also allows people to take the code without sharing their improvements to it.
**Yes: GPL. This ensures that any future changes/improvements to the code remain free and open.

*Should commercial usage be possible?
**Commercial use in form of services sold that are performed with the help of the software cannot be restricted with open source software licences. They only require that any derived software my not be distributed - and that includes '''sold''' - as ''closed source''.

* Strong copyleft licenses, most prominently the GNU Public License family (GPL, AGPL, LGPL)
* "Permissive" licenses: BSD, MIT, Apache

The main difference between these two groups is an ideological one.

=== Strong copyleft licenses ===

Strong copyleft licenses, on the other hand, ensure that improvements are always shared under a "compatible" license as well. This has the important consequence that software written under such a license can not be included in “non-free” software. The GPL licenses are:

* GPL: the basic GPL license
* AGPL: Affero GNU GPL. closes a loophole in the GPL that permits somebody to operate a web application that uses GPL code, without making the code available to users
* LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not.

=== Permissive licenses ===

The article [https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project] on [https://www.freebsd.org/ freebsd.org]. The permissive licenses allow code to be re-used with no restrictions, including the possibility to build commercial software for which new code is no longer made publicly available at all.

== Data ==

NOTE: This part is lacking a text describing the ODbL license ([http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/]) and its advantages/disadvantages compared with the Creative Commons licenses.

*Creative Commons licenses
**[http://creativecommons.org/ http://creativecommons.org/]

*Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL)
**Places no restrictions at all on the use of the licensed entities
**Source: [http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/summary/]

*OSM-Licence: Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL)
**[http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/]

*There is a [https://www.govdata.de/lizenzen Datenlizenz Deutschland] used by govdata.de, but there are no real differences to Creative Commons except that a German data portal wanted to have a German licence which is checked by German lawers
**Attribution License (ODC-By): (analog to CC-by) differs from ODbL mainly because of missing copyleft regulation, demands basicly to mention the author

 

== Other ==

The Creative Commons license family is probably most widely known. As of now (September 2015), the fourth version of these licenses have been published.

*Do you want to assure that derived works must be published under a similar (compatible) license? → Creative Commons Share-alike (CC-BY-SA). This is the license for example chosen by Wikipedia.
*Do you want to allow commercial use? → Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA)
*Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide? → Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND)

= FAQ =

== At what point of time to choose/can I change license? ==

With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence

Can I change the licence: The important thing is that, when you receive a copy of source code with a particular license, you have been granted that license. So long as the license doesn't have a revocation clause, it's permanent. Stackoverflow question: www.stackoverflow.com/questions/3498237/what-happens-when-an-open-source-project-changes-its-license

But the license can be changed: You can change the licence for the next version/release if all contributors (copyright holders) agree, or have previously agreed on the possibility of doing so, via a contributor agreement. Search for "contributor (license/assignment) agreement" online, for pointers on how to enable the latter up front. (cf. [http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements http://opensource.org/faq#contributor-agreements], [http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Contributor_Agreements])

Open Question: Is it better to start with the most restrictive copyleft license (GNU GPL) and possibly relax licensing arrangements at a later date or for specific people/institutions?

== What does sublicensing mean? ==

"The basic idea [...] is that if this is granted, a licensee can become a licensor of some of the rights of the grant they received regardless of any other claim they may have to copyright control over what they distribute." Source: [https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means https://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/189633/what-sublicense-actually-means]

Sublicensing allows somebody to relicense all or part of the licensed software, for example, to use BSD-licensed code in a closed-source commercial application.

== What effects does it have to use a "non-commercial" restricting license? ==

The article [http://blog.okfn.org/2013/01/08/consequences-risks-and-side-effects-of-the-license-module-non-commercial-use-only-2/ Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only”] on the Open Knowledge blog - and especially the linked [http://openglam.org/files/2013/01/iRights_CC-NC_Guide_English.pdf 22 page leaflet (PDF)] - comprehensively discusses that question. TL;DR: The leaflet answers the question "Does the NC [non-commercial] module prevent commercial usage?" with "Yes, but often all in the wrong places."

= Further reading =

*The Software Sustainability Institute (UK) provides [http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/adopting-open-source-licence information and answers to frequently asked questions]. The questions dealt with include:
**“Why is an open-source licence useful?”
**“How can I tell the difference between open-source licences?”
**“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?”
**“What do I need to do before applying my choice of licence?”
*This Nature commentary article dispels common excuses for not publishing scientific code and argues that code should be published more frequently. [http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html Barnes N (2010), Publish your computer code: it is good enough, Nature 467, 753. doi:10.1038/467753a]
*The following paper contains a good overview of different licenses and some of the questions one might ask when deciding on a license, from the point of view of a programming scientist: [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598 Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012), A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Comput Biol 8(7): e1002598. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598]
*[https://tldrlegal.com/ TLDRlegal.com] summarizes a wide range of popular licenses in an easy to read format
*Help for choosing a license for software from GitHub at [http://choosealicense.com/ ChooseALicense.com]
*[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”)
**Open Source Licenses: wallow in the abundunce of licenses out there, then come back to the FAQ and read “Which Open Source license should I choose to release my software under?”
*[https://www.wbs-law.de/it-recht/open-source-lizenzen-ein-uberblick-35752/ Article (in German) with overview of different open licenses and problems]
*[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses]