[oc] licensing made easy (2nd try)

[Rudolf Usselmann <rudi@asics.ws>]

So, I haven't heard any feedback at all about my suggestion.

Appears to me everybody feels strong about licensing, here
is suggestion to make it obvious and clear what kind of a
license each core is under. Am I totally off ? Is this a
stupid idea ?

Thoughts ? Suggestions ? Volunteers ?  :*)

Thanks,
rudi



-----Forwarded Message-----

From: Rudolf Usselmann <rudi@asics.ws>
To: cores@opencores.org
Subject: [oc] licensing made easy
Date: 07 May 2003 12:05:52 +0700


I think there have been many very good explanations and
comments about licensing. I think I understand it alot
better now that I did before. Thanks a lot to everybody
for clarifying all the details !

What I would like to suggest, is to create a second FAQ/
guideline for licensing, that starts of very, very simple,
and goes in to more details as people are reading on. The
goal is to better assist an IP author to make the correct
choice for the way he wants to distribute his IP. It should
include view points from both sides. e.g. there seem to be
strong feelings about GPL on both sides. They should be
clearly presented.

Once this is in place, I would suggest to add another entry
to the project header ("Details" on a project page) that
states the licensing type for that project. Choices might
be: GPL, LGPL, BSD, User Provided, etc.

Perhaps the FAQ/Guideline, should also have a section for
commercial users, summarizing their rights and obligations
with every license type.

What you guys think about that ?

I think John D's write up might be a good starting point !

Regards,
rudi               
-------------------------------------------------------
www.asics.ws  -- Solutions for your ASIC/FPGA needs ---
---------------- FPGAs * Full Custom ICs * IP Cores ---
* * * FREE IP Cores  --> http://www.asics.ws/ <-- * * *




--
To unsubscribe from cores mailing list please visit http://www.opencores.org/mailinglists.shtml