[RCD] SPAM: Re: Rev 3683 - Skin License Issue

Emerson Pinter epinter at picturecorp.com.br
Mon May 31 13:29:49 CEST 2010


What the developers want relicensing the skin ?
Slowdown the adoption of roundcube ?

I don't believe roundcube will receive many contributions (talking about
the skin) from the commercial users, like ISPs.

Why I will contribute with a code to be used in the default skin if I
can't use it ?


On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:38:57 +0200, Jonas Meurer <jonas at freesources.org>
wrote:
> hey,
> 
> On 28/05/2010 Carlos Pasqualini wrote:
>> the change you make to the license of the Default Skin, as i can
>> understand, makes so difficult for a company to use roundcube for
>> commercial purposes.
>> 
>> The license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ states that
>> you have lots of attributions but "Not commercial Use".
>> 
>> I think that roundcube needs to have a "base theme" (GPL, CC-by-sa,
>> CC-by, etc) from which one can build themes without having legal
issues.
> 
> i agree with you that CC-by-nc is a bad license for the default skin.
> For example it's a reason to keep roundcube out of linux/bsd/...
> distributions.
> 
> i don't know whether relicensing the default skin is an option. if not,
> then a new default skin with a more permissive, really free license
> would be necessary.
> 
> FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Ubuntu, Debian and Fedora all have roundcube
> available as package/port, and they would need to drop/substitude the
> skin in order to update the package/port to latest version.
> 
>> Suppose a webmaster, adapting a RC Theme to suit the graphical design
of
>> a given bussiness, with the new license that job cannot use the default
>> skin as a start base; the new skin needs to be written from scratch!.
>> For every new version of roundcube, the entire skin needs to be
>> reviewed.
>> 
>> The other point, i'm even more worried about, is using roundcube as the
>> webmail solution on a ISP, using the default skin. I'm reading the
>> entire CC-by-nc license, but if this is a commercial use of the skin...
>> ¿does it fit into the permissions granted by the Skin's license?
>> 
>> i would be less worried if the license was CC-by-sa
> 
> yes, version 3 of CC-by-sa would be good. even better would be a more
> permissive license. for debians point of view (as an example) see
> http://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses
> 
> greetings,
>  jonas
> 
> 
> 
>  --- 8< --- detachments --- 8< ---
>  The following attachments have been detached and are available for
>  viewing.
>   http://detached.gigo.com/rc/CT/kKMDZTUg/signature.asc
>  Only click these links if you trust the sender, as well as this
message.
>  --- 8< --- detachments --- 8< ---

-- 
Emerson Pinter




 --- 8< --- detachments --- 8< ---
 The following attachments have been detached and are available for viewing.
  http://detached.gigo.com/rc/hB/RGFB9Lox/disclaimer.txt
 Only click these links if you trust the sender, as well as this message.
 --- 8< --- detachments --- 8< ---

-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/


More information about the Dev mailing list