Pauline

上班第二週

產出一個Comparison of free and open-source software licenses的chart

比較GNU General Public License 3.0, Perl5 (Artistic License 2.0) 及NCSA Open source License的差異

網路上中英文版的比較表所在多有

但資訊紛陳 莫衷一是

就如modify/distribute後

是否還要以open source的形式公開原始碼

查到的答案都是yes

但真正看了以上三個license agreement之後

我的答案卻是完全相反

以最嚴格的GNU而言

6. Conveying Non-Source Forms.
You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms of sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the machine-readable Corresponding Source under the terms of this License, in one of these ways:

第6條以不就直接載明可以非源碼形式轉發嗎?

Artistic License也說接受object code

並清楚地定義“Compiled" form means the compiled bytecode, object code, binary, or any other form resulting from mechanical transformation or translation of the Source form.

另外 修改後可以使用不同的授權條款嗎?

GNU我是以先射箭再畫箭靶的方式去找(笑)

5. Conveying Modified Source Versions.

You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
◾a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modifiedit, and giving a relevant date.
◾b) The work must carry prominent notices stating that it isreleased under this License and any conditions added under section7. This requirement modifies the requirement in section 4 to “keep intact all notices”.
◾c) You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy. ThisLicense will therefore apply, along with any applicable section 7 additional terms, to the whole of the work, and all its parts,regardless of how they are packaged. This License gives no permission to license the work in any other way, but it does notinvalidate such permission if you have separately received it.
◾d) If the work has interactive user interfaces, each must displayAppropriate Legal Notices; however, if the Program has interactiveinterfaces that do not display Appropriate Legal Notices, yourwork need not make them do so.

c)說 本協定不允許以其他形式授權該作品 

我看到under this License 肩膀就鬆了下來 i got you ;)

Artistic License就很直截了當

一個是原授權條款 or or or 重要的事情說三次

也就是可以不用原本的license agreement喽~

(4) You may Distribute your Modified Version as Source... 
(c) allow anyone who receives a copy of the Modified Version to make the Source form of the Modified Version available to others under：
 (i) the Original License or 
 (ii) a license that permits the licensee to freely copy, modify and redistribute the Modified Version using the same licensing terms that apply to the copy that the licensee received, and requires that the Source form of the Modified Version, and of any works derived from it, be made freely available in that license fees are prohibited but Distributor Fees are allowed.

我判斷不出來的是

Artistic License允許sublicense嗎?

(4) You may Distribute your Modified Version as Source (either gratis or for a Distributor Fee, and with or without a Compiled form of the Modified Version) provided that you clearly document how it differs from the Standard Version, including, but not limited to, documenting any non-standard features, executables, or modules, and provided that you do at least ONE of the following:

(a) make the Modified Version available to the Copyright Holder of the Standard Version, under the Original License, so that the Copyright Holder may include your modifications in the Standard Version.
 (b) ensure that installation of your Modified Version does not prevent the user installing or running the Standard Version. In addition, the Modified Version must bear a name that is different from the name of the Standard Version.
 (c) allow anyone who receives a copy of the Modified Version to make the Source form of the Modified Version available to others under
 (i) the Original License or
 (ii) a license that permits the licensee to freely copy, modify and redistribute the Modified Version using the same licensing terms that apply to the copy that the licensee received, and requires that the Source form of the Modified Version, and of any works derived from it, be made freely available in that license fees are prohibited but Distributor Fees are allowed.

從(b)來看 允許他人安裝你的使用版本 這似乎已經是再授權使用?

從(c)觀之 允許任何一位取得修改版本副本的人 均可以選擇一種方式來授權修改版本的源碼形式 是否就是sublicense?

well, I don't know.

不太知道禮拜五要怎麼跟大家投影報告

誰可以救我 cry......

GNU說不准sublicense  而是automatic licensing of downstream recipients

2. Basic Permissions.
Sublicensing is not allowed; section 10 makes it unnecessary.

NCSA說可以sublicense 

permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal with the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

Artistic License到底要怎樣啦 讓人好挫折啊:(

最後

當然no warranty

free open source誰compensate damage

fee of charge的部分 有本事你當然可以用來賺錢

以下是新工作小記:

年輕時對自己有一些期許

35歲年薪跟40歲年薪  基本都達標了

然後 我希望自己40歲之前進入半導體產業

感謝主 39歲的生日前一天

敲定了這份工作

未來的路還長

人不是為了反抗過去才成就未來

伊比鳩魯說 The wise man seeks no activity related to struggle.

願我們都幸福的 平凡而有節制的生活著 :D