<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Apologies -- Ted Ralphs pointed out
to me that only object code can be redistributed under different licenses...
</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Sorry for the unproductive spam.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Alan</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Alan King<br>
Math Sciences<br>
IBM Thomas J Watson Research Center<br>
914-945-1236<br>
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/k/kingaj/</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td width=40%><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Soeren Sonnenburg <Soeren.Sonnenburg@first.fraunhofer.de></b>
</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sent by: coin-discuss-bounces@list.coin-or.org</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">04/11/2008 03:40 PM</font>
<td width=59%>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">To</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Alan King/Watson/IBM@IBMUS</font>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">cc</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">coin-discuss@list.coin-or.org</font>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Subject</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re: [Coin-discuss] COIN-OR licences
again...</font></table>
<br>
<table>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td></table>
<br></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>On Fri, 2008-04-11 at 15:28 -0400, Alan King wrote:<br>
> <br>
> According to the CPL, anyone can redistribute the software under any<br>
> kind of license, provided the terms of the CPL are met. These
are:<br>
> the disclaimers, and where to get the source code if it is not<br>
> included in the bundle. <br>
<br>
This would be too good to be true.<br>
<br>
> Again -- what is the problem? <br>
<br>
I am no lawyer, but isn't #12 of<br>
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/os-cplfaq.html<br>
<br>
what we are talking about?<br>
<br>
On the other hand reading<br>
<br>
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#CommonPublicLicense10<br>
<br>
it might be that this is all just outdated information... I am going to<br>
write to licensing@fsf.org ... lets see what they say.<br>
<br>
Soeren<br>
<br>
> Alan <br>
> <br>
> Alan King<br>
> Math Sciences<br>
> IBM Thomas J Watson Research Center<br>
> 914-945-1236<br>
> http://www.research.ibm.com/people/k/kingaj/ <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> Soeren Sonnenburg<br>
> <Soeren.Sonnenburg@first.fraunhofer.de> <br>
> <br>
> 04/11/2008 02:08 PM <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> To<br>
> Ted Ralphs<br>
> <ted@lehigh.edu> <br>
> cc<br>
> Alan<br>
> King/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, coin-discuss@list.coin-or.org <br>
> Subject<br>
> Re:<br>
> [Coin-discuss]<br>
> COIN-OR licences<br>
> again...<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> Indeed, there must be some misunderstanding. I am bringing up this<br>
> discussion because the only ways to combine (and redistribute) GPL'd<br>
> and<br>
> CPL'd code is to <br>
> <br>
> a) get the copyright holders of the GPL'd code to add an explicit<br>
> exception that it is OK to link with the project using CPL'd code<br>
> <br>
> and <br>
> <br>
> b) get the copyright holders of the CPL'd code to dual license to
a<br>
> GPL<br>
> compatible license<br>
> <br>
> Soeren<br>
> <br>
> On Fri, 2008-04-11 at 13:14 -0400, Ted Ralphs wrote:<br>
> > Somewhere, there's a misunderstanding. Are you saying that anyone<br>
> can<br>
> > redistribute CPL'd software under the GPL? This is not true.
Only<br>
> the<br>
> > copyright holders can change the license. In source code form,
you<br>
> can<br>
> > distribute a combination of GPL'd and CPL'd code, but the CPL'd
code<br>
> > remains under the CPL. You cannot distribute binaries derived
from<br>
> > combinations of the two. The CPL would allow this, but the GPL
does<br>
> not.<br>
> > <br>
> > Cheers,<br>
> > <br>
> > Ted<br>
> > <br>
> > Alan King wrote:<br>
> > > <br>
> > > CPL does not prevent anyone from bundling all of COIN and<br>
> distributing<br>
> > > it under GPL, so long as the disclaimers are present. <br>
> > > What is the problem?<br>
> > > <br>
> > > Alan King<br>
> > > Math Sciences<br>
> > > IBM Thomas J Watson Research Center<br>
> > > 914-945-1236<br>
> > > http://www.research.ibm.com/people/k/kingaj/<br>
> > > <br>
> > > <br>
> > > *Ted Ralphs <ted@lehigh.edu>*<br>
> > > Sent by: coin-discuss-bounces@list.coin-or.org<br>
> > > <br>
> > > 04/11/2008 12:42 PM<br>
> > > <br>
> > >
<br>
> > > To<br>
> > >
Soeren Sonnenburg<br>
> <Soeren.Sonnenburg@first.fraunhofer.de><br>
> > > cc<br>
> > >
coin-discuss@list.coin-or.org<br>
> > > Subject<br>
> > >
Re: [Coin-discuss] COIN-OR licences again...<br>
> > > <br>
> > > <br>
> > >
<br>
> > > <br>
> > > <br>
> > > <br>
> > > <br>
> > > <br>
> > > Personal like/dislike of the FSF/GPL are not at all the
reason for<br>
> the<br>
> > > improbability of adoption of a dual licensing scheme for
COIN. For<br>
> > > practical reasons, I personally would probably agree to
dual<br>
> license the<br>
> > > software for which I am the copyright holder if others would<br>
> follow<br>
> > > suit. As far as the reasons why it is unlikely that other<br>
> copyright<br>
> > > holders would do this, I can only speculate, as many others
have<br>
> already<br>
> > > done in this thread and others. Ultimately, someone within
the<br>
> > > organizations holding the copyrights has to champion this
cause<br>
> and even<br>
> > > then, I would say the chances are very slim. As several
have<br>
> pointed<br>
> > > out, if the GPL were an acceptable alternative to the parties<br>
> concerned,<br>
> > > why would the CPL exist in the first place? Food for thought...<br>
> > > <br>
> > > Cheers,<br>
> > > <br>
> > > Ted<br>
> > > <br>
> > > Soeren Sonnenburg wrote:<br>
> > >> On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 11:31 -0400, Ted Ralphs wrote:<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> Ted,<br>
> > >><br>
> > >>> As a point of information relevant to this thread,
there is an<br>
> effort<br>
> > >>> underway by members of the Technical Leadership
Council and<br>
> others to<br>
> > >>> develop a set of RPM's and .debs for Linux that
will include the<br>
> vast<br>
> > >>> majority of the projects. Of course, we will not
be able to link<br>
> with<br>
> > >>> any third-party libraries that are GPL'd, but nevertheless,
we<br>
> have been<br>
> > >>> able to build distributable binaries of most of
the projects. I<br>
> don't<br>
> > >>> think the fact that the binaries will be under the
CPL should<br>
> impact<br>
> > >>> most users that much, though clearly the license
conflict is<br>
> less than<br>
> > >>> ideal. Stay tuned for more details.<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> I agree, for pure users it does not matter, as they
won't mess<br>
> with the<br>
> > >> code. In the case of COIN-OR it is different though,
as it is<br>
> made for<br>
> > >> developers who like to use and extend the code...<br>
> > >><br>
> > >>> As for the dual licensing idea, that has been discussed
on and<br>
> off for a<br>
> > >>> long time and there is very little chance of it
happening.<br>
> However, we<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> Could you give a reason why this is unlikely? That it
has been<br>
> discussed<br>
> > >> a couple of times just underlines that there is a need
to change<br>
> > >> things...<br>
> > >><br>
> > >>> will keep the conversation going. To date, there
has not been<br>
> universal<br>
> > >>> agreement in the legal community that the clauses
in the GPL<br>
> that forbid<br>
> > >>> dynamic linking are enforceable, but for now, we
are not in a<br>
> position<br>
> > >>> to test those waters. Hopefully, someone will do
so at some<br>
> point and we<br>
> > >>> will have a legitimate and dispassionate legal interpretation<br>
> rather<br>
> > >>> than the FSFs self-interested one.<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> I would not want this to end up in a discussion whether
the GPL<br>
> valid,<br>
> > >> good or bad. Lets simply accept (or tolerate) the FSF's
position<br>
> here<br>
> > >> and find a solution with which everyone, IBM, COIN-OR
developers<br>
> and<br>
> > >> (potential) COIN-OR users are happy.<br>
> > >><br>
> > >>> One can argue that encouraging wider<br>
> > >>> use of the GPL is not actually good for open source,
but it is a<br>
> > >>> practical reality that much of the world's OS software
is GPL'd,<br>
> so that<br>
> > >>> is the reality we have to deal with. Thanks for
your support!<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> Well that does not really sound dispassionate. If the
reason why<br>
> dual<br>
> > >> licensing is not an option is that there is a strong
dislike<br>
> against<br>
> > >> any GPL compatible license from the people in charge
here, then<br>
> nothing<br>
> > >> will change. If the aim is to see coin-or projects widely
used<br>
> however<br>
> > >> it is important to consider dual licensing with another
more<br>
> compatible<br>
> > >> license. As I guess the goal for IBM to open sourcing
this<br>
> project was<br>
> > >> so see it widely used and extended I would hope that
a solution<br>
> can be<br>
> > >> found.<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> Best,<br>
> > >> Soeren<br>
> > > <br>
> > > <br>
> > > -- <br>
> > > Dr. Ted Ralphs<br>
> > > Associate Professor<br>
> > > Industrial and Systems Engineering<br>
> > > Lehigh University<br>
> > > (610)758-4784<br>
> > > ted 'at' lehigh 'dot' edu<br>
> > > coral.ie.lehigh.edu/~ted<br>
> > > _______________________________________________<br>
> > > Coin-discuss mailing list<br>
> > > Coin-discuss@list.coin-or.org<br>
> > > http://list.coin-or.org/mailman/listinfo/coin-discuss<br>
> > > <br>
> > <br>
> > <br>
> -- <br>
> Soeren Sonnenburg - Fraunhofer FIRST Tel: +49
(30) 6392 1882<br>
> Kekulestr. 7, 12489 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49
(30) 6392 1805<br>
> <br>
-- <br>
Soeren Sonnenburg - Fraunhofer FIRST Tel: +49 (30)
6392 1882<br>
Kekulestr. 7, 12489 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49 (30)
6392 1805<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Coin-discuss mailing list<br>
Coin-discuss@list.coin-or.org<br>
http://list.coin-or.org/mailman/listinfo/coin-discuss<br>
</font></tt>
<br>