Re: [PLUG] Plug talk on OS licenses?

["Paul L. Snyder" <plsnyder@drexel.edu>]

Quoting Warwick Poole <plug@linuxinternet.org>:

> Would anyone be interested in a talk on the various available Open-Source
> approved licenses and how they differ from each other and what each one
> means for both developers and users of software?

Personally, I wouldn't mind a shorter talk (i.e., 20-30 minutes at most). 
If this were to be the only topic on the schedule I'd be likely to skip,
unless the presentation would reveal some significant arcana or special
knowledge.

There are a lot of one-page summaries of the major licenses (GPL, LGPL, BSD,
Artistic, MPL), and I'd hope a talk like this would go deeper than the
information revealed by a fast Google search.  Also, most of the ~60
licenses on the OSI-approved list are irrelevant to most developers or
users; I don't think the "EU DataGrid Software License" is going to be of
much interest to most users or developers in PLUG.

Some authoritative analysis of deeper topics would be more useful.  A few
things I'm curious about:

 * How far can "internal use" of GPL-derivative works extend before you
   have to release your modified code?

 * When is a proprietary kernel module okay, and when is it in violation
   of the GPL?

 * If you have a dual-licensed product (i.e., Qt) is it really okay to
   integrate bugfixes contributed against the GPL version into the
   commercial version?

 * How far can Sun's "Open" licenses be trusted?  What are the details?

 * What are the ramifications of the current flap about software patents?
   What are the risks to developers who release Open Source code?

Just my personal opinion.

pls
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --        http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug