|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − |
| |
| | = Why should you pick a license? = | | = Why should you pick a license? = |
| | | | |
| Line 11: |
Line 10: |
| | *Code: look at software licenses | | *Code: look at software licenses |
| | *Data: look at data licenses | | *Data: look at data licenses |
| | + | *Other (reports, documentation, figures): look at Creative Commons licenses |
| | | | |
| | == Software == | | == Software == |
| Line 33: |
Line 33: |
| | *Do you want to allow commercial use?<br/>→ Creative Commons Non-commercial (CC-BY-NC) or (CC-BY-NC-SA) | | *Do you want to allow commercial use?<br/>→ 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?<br/>→ Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND) | | *Do you want to allow others to share changes or improvements to your data, or only the unchanged original data that you provide?<br/>→ Creative Commons No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) or (CC-BY-NC-ND) |
| | + | |
| | + | |
| | + | == Other == |
| | + | |
| | + | Creative Commons licenses go here. |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | = Important Licences and their differences = | | = Important Licences and their differences = |
| | + | |
| | + | :!: To be merged with the previous section. |
| | | | |
| | == Software == | | == Software == |
| Line 53: |
Line 60: |
| | *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 | | *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. | | *LGPL: Lesser GPL. Permits non-free software to link to the LGPL-licensed software, which the GPL does not. |
| − |
| |
| − | === Q: 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.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | === Q: What are the differences between license versions? ===
| |
| − |
| |
| − | TBA
| |
| − |
| |
| | | | |
| | == Data == | | == Data == |
| Line 81: |
Line 77: |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| − | = Other considerations =
| |
| | | | |
| − | == At what point of time to choose / can I change license? == | + | = 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 | | With the first release (if possible already for “small” releases like within your institute) detmermine a licence |
| Line 93: |
Line 92: |
| | 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? | | 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? == |
| | | | |
| − | = Links and further information = | + | "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: | | *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: |
| Line 101: |
Line 106: |
| | **“What happens if I am using someone else's code in my software?” | | **“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?” | | **“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] | | *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] | | *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] |
| Line 108: |
Line 112: |
| | *[http://opensource.org Opensource.org]: lots of helpful information esp. under FAQ (e.g. provides an aswer to “Why not use CC for code?”) | | *[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?” | | **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] | | *[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] | | *[http://www.ifross.org/lizenz-center/ Detailed list (in German) of licenses] |
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.
The main difference between these two groups is an ideological one. 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. GPL licenses, on the other hand, ensure that improvements are always shared under the GPL as well, and GPL-licensed software can not be included in “non-free” software.
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://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?
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.
