Re: Source licensing

From: Karl Auerbach <karl_at_cavebear_dot_com>
Date: Sun May 09 2004 - 18:45:27 CDT

On Sun, 9 May 2004, David Mertz wrote:

> I find it deeply offensive--though obviously I know it's not factually
> unusual--for my tax dollars to fund development of unfree software.

A lot of universities, public and private, retain intellectual property
rights and license them to generate fee income.

In any event, I don't think anyone is advocating a retreat from GPL like
copyright/license terms.

However, there is a distinct issue regarding licensing by the OVC (for
money) of service marks associated with the software.

Because this is voting software and because image and perception are
incredibly important, no matter the license, we may very well want to put
the project under ISO 9000x type processes. I know that much of this is
paperwork - form over substance - but this kind of thing can help overcome
a lot of perceptual objections.

We need to define coding rules, tests and regression tests, documentation
standards, and other such processes. To my mind the testing/QA part of
this project is substantially larger than the basic coding effort.

                --karl--

==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Mon May 31 23:17:28 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:16 CDT