Bobtime Project

[Master of Reality]

which liscense to choose for my bobtime clock that 'we' will be developing:
GNU General Public License (GPL)
GNU Library or "lesser" Public License (LGPL)
BSD License
MIT License
Artistic License
Mozilla Public License(MPL)
Qt Public License(QPL)
IBM Public License
MITRE Collaborative Virtual Workspace License (CVW License)
Ricoh Source Code Publice License
Python License (CNRI Python License)
Python Software Foundation License
zlib/libpng License
Apache Software License
Voyida Software License 1.0
Sun Industry Standards License (SISSL)

Intel Open Source License
Mozilla Public License 1.1 (MPL 1.1)
Jabber Open Source License
Nokia Open Source License
Sleepycat License
Nethack General Public License
Common Public License
Apple Public Source License
X.Net License
Sun Public License
Eiffel Forum License
W3C License
Motosoto License
Open Group Test Suite License
Zope Public License
University of Illinois/NCSA Open Source License
Academic Free License (AFL)
Attribution Assurance License
Public Domain

of course there are some which i will obviously not be using, i just listed the available ones that SourceForge requires I use.

[ August 31, 2002: Message edited by: Master of Reality / Bob ]

[Master of Reality]

After taking 3 fucking hours of reading most of those Licenses I haven chosen the obvious choice of the GNU General Public License (GPL).
I have submitted the project to sourcforge and within two business days i should get a reply.

[TheQuirk]

I think it should be under the BSD license.

But it's your program.

[choasforages]

doh, you should have use the LGPL, it lets major products link witht the bobclock

[flap]

quote:I think it should be under the BSD license.

Why, may I ask?

[Calum]

people who say that usually think that all the GPL stuff should be released under the BSD licence because they reckon it is selfish to not want people to steal your code, make money from it and walk all over you morally.

You should have used the LGPL as stated above.

[flap]

Well he is using the GPL, so what's wrong with that?

[TheQuirk]

only GPL software could use it. LGPL would be another alternative, but I think it should be under the BSD license because everyone should be able to use it, not just a select few.

[flap]

er, that's the whole point. Why should people who aren't using the GPL be allowed to use GPL code?

The only reason to use the LPGL is if you are providing a free alternative to something that is already established but non-free, such as a library, and you want your free library to become more widely used than the proprietary version.

[TheQuirk]

"Why should people who aren't using the GPL be allowed to use GPL code?"

Because they might be using another license for some reason (GPL isn't everything). It might be open source, just not GPLed. So LGPL/BSD should be used.

If it's a clock, I think everyone should be able to use it in their  code.

Isn't that program just a few lines of code, anyway?

[flap]

"GPL isn't everything"

I beg to differ. Why should anyone use any other licence? If I write Free Software I want to be sure that no-one is going to include it in anything slightly less-than-free.

Yes, it is only presumably a few lines and not really likely to be raped by Microsoft for inclusion in Bloat XP 2004 but it's the general principle I'm disagreeing with you on. The GPL is watertight so you know your code is safely Free.

[Calum]

actually, yes, the GPL should be everything. BSD licence be damned, those guys are too nice.

X Windows is a good example of what happens if you release stuff using the BSD licence or similar, you get nothing for writing it, but some other bugger can hijack your free code, change a few lines and then sell closed source versions of it for a shitload of money. not good.

[flap]

Well that's true, but the point of the GPL's resitrctions isn't to protect programmers; it's to protect society. If you write Free software there's nothing to stop RedHat etc. using it in their distribution and paying you nothing for it, but society still gets the benefit as it remains free.

[Calum]

yes i agree of course, but this is also the case with the BSD licence. the difference being that you forfeit all rights to your own software if you use the BSD licence.

Also, even if society is one's main concern, we must of course always phrase these things in selfish terms to get people to take notice. people do not do things unless they can see the benefit to them.

[Master of Reality]

this project will be bigger than just a clock. I plan to eventually have a calender, time server, etc.
What is the clock in linux Licensed as? GPL is it not?
I think that maybe i will change the license if it actually needs to be changed, but i doubt millions of other programs and such will want to use my clock.