[RCD] Licensing discussion

chasd chasd at silveroaks.com
Fri Jan 22 16:32:49 CET 2010


On Jan 22, 2010, at 8:50 AM, Thomas Bruederli wrote:

> 1) Upgrade to GPLv3
> Since I'm not very familiar with all the details I currently don't  
> know
> what kind of changes this would involve but I assume it to be an  
> easy and
> obvious step.

Depending on how you read GPLv3, it may mean all libraries and plug- 
ins would need to be GPLv3 too.

IANAL.

There is also the BSD license and MIT license if you are looking for  
a more liberal license than the GPL.
I have seen projects use the Apache license, which you may want to  
evaluate.

The Fedora Project is very strict about the licensing of the packages  
in the Fedora distribution. There are good resources for licenses at :

<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ>
<http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing>

> For options 1) and 2) there's one addition: I think that we should  
> exclude
> the skins from the GPL restrictions because the easy customization  
> is what
> makes Roundcube nice and custom skins often include some copyrighted
> artwork and are pretty individual.

Content is not code, and a license for code is generally not a good  
license for content.

Skins are a grey area, they are part code, part content, but I think  
a skin leans more toward content.

A Creative Commons license may be more appropriate for skins.



-- 
Charles Dostale
System Admin - Silver Oaks Communications
http://www.silveroaks.com/
824 17th Street, Moline  IL  61265

_______________________________________________
List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/



More information about the Dev mailing list