[Coin-discuss] COIN-OR licences again...

Fri Apr 11 14:18:14 EDT 2008

Correct me if I am wrong: it is the "(and redistribute)" that adds the
complicating wrinkle.

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Soeren Sonnenburg
<Soeren.Sonnenburg at first.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> Indeed, there must be some misunderstanding. I am bringing up this
>  discussion because the only ways to combine (and redistribute) GPL'd and
>  CPL'd code is to
>
>  a) get the copyright holders of the GPL'd code to add an explicit
>  exception that it is OK to link with the project using CPL'd code
>
>  and
>
>  b) get the copyright holders of the CPL'd code to dual license to a GPL
>  compatible license
>
>  Soeren
>
>
>
>  On Fri, 2008-04-11 at 13:14 -0400, Ted Ralphs wrote:
>  > Somewhere, there's a misunderstanding. Are you saying that anyone can
>  > redistribute CPL'd software under the GPL? This is not true. Only the
>  > copyright holders can change the license. In source code form, you can
>  > distribute a combination of GPL'd and CPL'd code, but the CPL'd code
>  > remains under the CPL. You cannot distribute binaries derived from
>  > combinations of the two. The CPL would allow this, but the GPL does not.
>  >
>  > Cheers,
>  >
>  > Ted
>  >
>  > Alan King wrote:
>  > >
>  > > CPL does not prevent anyone from bundling all of COIN and distributing
>  > > it under GPL, so long as the disclaimers are present.
>  > > What is the problem?
>  > >
>  > > Alan King
>  > > Math Sciences
>  > > IBM Thomas J Watson Research Center
>  > > 914-945-1236
>  > > http://www.research.ibm.com/people/k/kingaj/
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > *Ted Ralphs <ted at lehigh.edu>*
>  > > Sent by: coin-discuss-bounces at list.coin-or.org
>  > >
>  > > 04/11/2008 12:42 PM
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > To
>  > >     Soeren Sonnenburg <Soeren.Sonnenburg at first.fraunhofer.de>
>  > > cc
>  > >     coin-discuss at list.coin-or.org
>  > > Subject
>  > >     Re: [Coin-discuss] COIN-OR licences again...
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > Personal like/dislike of the FSF/GPL are not at all the reason for the
>  > > improbability of adoption of a dual licensing scheme for COIN. For
>  > > practical reasons, I personally would probably agree to dual license the
>  > > software for which I am the copyright holder if others would follow
>  > > suit. As far as the reasons why it is unlikely that other copyright
>  > > holders would do this, I can only speculate, as many others have already
>  > > done in this thread and others. Ultimately, someone within the
>  > > organizations holding the copyrights has to champion this cause and even
>  > > then, I would say the chances are very slim. As several have pointed
>  > > out, if the GPL were an acceptable alternative to the parties concerned,
>  > > why would the CPL exist in the first place? Food for thought...
>  > >
>  > > Cheers,
>  > >
>  > > Ted
>  > >
>  > > Soeren Sonnenburg wrote:
>  > >> On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 11:31 -0400, Ted Ralphs wrote:
>  > >>
>  > >> Ted,
>  > >>
>  > >>> As a point of information relevant to this thread, there is an effort
>  > >>> underway by members of the Technical Leadership Council and others to
>  > >>> develop a set of RPM's and .debs for Linux that will include the vast
>  > >>> majority of the projects. Of course, we will not be able to link with
>  > >>> any third-party libraries that are GPL'd, but nevertheless, we have been
>  > >>> able to build distributable binaries of most of the projects. I don't
>  > >>> think the fact that the binaries will be under the CPL should impact
>  > >>> most users that much, though clearly the license conflict is less than
>  > >>> ideal. Stay tuned for more details.
>  > >>
>  > >> I agree, for pure users it does not matter, as they won't mess with the
>  > >> code. In the case of COIN-OR it is different though, as it is made for
>  > >> developers who like to use and extend the code...
>  > >>
>  > >>> As for the dual licensing idea, that has been discussed on and off for a
>  > >>> long time and there is very little chance of it happening. However, we
>  > >>
>  > >> Could you give a reason why this is unlikely? That it has been discussed
>  > >> a couple of times just underlines that there is a need to change
>  > >> things...
>  > >>
>  > >>> will keep the conversation going. To date, there has not been universal
>  > >>> agreement in the legal community that the clauses in the GPL that forbid
>  > >>> dynamic linking are enforceable, but for now, we are not in a position
>  > >>> to test those waters. Hopefully, someone will do so at some point and we
>  > >>> will have a legitimate and dispassionate legal interpretation rather
>  > >>> than the FSFs self-interested one.
>  > >>
>  > >> I would not want this to end up in a discussion whether the GPL valid,
>  > >> good or bad. Lets simply accept (or tolerate) the FSF's position here
>  > >> and find a solution with which everyone, IBM, COIN-OR developers and
>  > >> (potential) COIN-OR users are happy.
>  > >>
>  > >>> One can argue that encouraging wider
>  > >>> use of the GPL is not actually good for open source, but it is a
>  > >>> practical reality that much of the world's OS software is GPL'd, so that
>  > >>> is the reality we have to deal with. Thanks for your support!
>  > >>
>  > >> Well that does not really sound dispassionate. If the reason why dual
>  > >> licensing is not an option is that there is a strong dislike against
>  > >> any GPL compatible license from the people in charge here, then nothing
>  > >> will change. If the aim is to see coin-or projects widely used however
>  > >> it is important to consider dual licensing with another more compatible
>  > >> license. As I guess the goal for IBM to open sourcing this project was
>  > >> so see it widely used and extended I would hope that a solution can be
>  > >> found.
>  > >>
>  > >> Best,
>  > >> Soeren
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > --
>  > > Dr. Ted Ralphs
>  > > Associate Professor
>  > > Industrial and Systems Engineering
>  > > Lehigh University
>  > > (610)758-4784
>  > > ted 'at' lehigh 'dot' edu
>  > > coral.ie.lehigh.edu/~ted
>  > > _______________________________________________
>  > > Coin-discuss mailing list
>  > > Coin-discuss at list.coin-or.org
>  > > http://list.coin-or.org/mailman/listinfo/coin-discuss
>  > >
>  >
>  >
>  --
>
>
> Soeren Sonnenburg - Fraunhofer FIRST      Tel: +49 (30) 6392 1882
>  Kekulestr. 7, 12489 Berlin, Germany       Fax: +49 (30) 6392 1805
>
> _______________________________________________
>  Coin-discuss mailing list
>  Coin-discuss at list.coin-or.org
>  http://list.coin-or.org/mailman/listinfo/coin-discuss
>
>

-- 
========================================================================
Leonardo B. Lopes
Assistant Professor SIE - University of Arizona
(520)621-2342
leo at sie.arizona.edu
http://www.sie.arizona.edu/faculty/leolopes