any open source license expert?

[Rex Chung]

Hi,

I am looking for some advice on the risks involved with the different
types of licenses
e.g. GPL 2/3, LGPL, MIT, BSD

Any expert on the list for a quick consultation?

Thank you,
Rex Chung
CEO and Founder
Ankoder - Video Encoding On Demand
http://www.ankoder.com
--------------------------------------
Sydney: +61 421 591 943
HK: +852 6901 2682
Twitter: @rexchung @ankoder

[steven_noble]

Hi Rex,

If by 'risk' you mean 'legal risk' you could try Brendan Scott, who
runs Open Source Law in Newtown

http://www.opensourcelaw.biz

Cheers,

Steven.

On Oct 25, 6:12 am, Rex Chung <rex.ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am looking for some advice on the risks involved with the different
> types of licenses
> e.g. GPL 2/3, LGPL, MIT, BSD
>
> Any expert on the list for a quick consultation?
>
> Thank you,
> Rex Chung
> CEO and Founder

> Ankoder - Video Encoding On Demandhttp://www.ankoder.com

[Shaneel Mudaliar]

Hi Rex,
You can send me your specific question, and I can assist you (www.seedlegal.com
).

Seed Legal specialises in IT & Telecom matters.

Kind regards
Shaneel


Sent from my iPhone (0413502191)

[Ryan Cross]

Hey Rex, 

I am not a lawyer, but I have quite a bit of experience in open source and could probably answer most of your questions. I would also suggest checking out the mailing list on the OSI website. http://opensource.org/lists

I also know that Andrew Perry who specialises in open source licensing issues. http://legalconsult.com.au

-Ryan 

[Silvia Pfeiffer]

Hi Rex,

If by "risk" you mean "risk of code being stolen", then it's a fairly
simple thing:

BSD/MIT - both basically mean that anyone can use your code in any
application (closed source/open source etc)
GPL2/3 - basically means that if you use that code in your
application, you have to open source your application
LGPL - basically means that you can use that library with closed
source applications only if you dynamically link to it - otherwise you
have to open source your application

If you mean "legal risk", well then I can only say: they are all
fairly well thought out licenses to protect the people that write and
publish the code.

A more direct question could help though.

Cheers,
Silvia.

On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Rex Chung <rex....@gmail.com> wrote:
>

[Rob Manson]

Hi Silvia,

your point assumes you're creating a compiled application...which is
possibly the minority of software startups nowadays.

This allows for many other shades of grey and other benefits... 8)

On Sun, 2009-10-25 at 11:23 +1100, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> GPL2/3 - basically means that if you use that code in your
> application, you have to open source your application

--
Rob Manson
Managing Director

MOB - start something!
Innovative mobile & online business
http://MOB-labs.com.au

m: +61423215731
e: roB...@MOB-labs.com.au
l: http://www.linkedin.com/in/robertmanson
t: http://twitter.com/nambor
s: http://slideshare.net/robman

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Create & manage your own Augmented Reality layer with just a few clicks
http://buildAR.com - Extend your reality
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[Silvia Pfeiffer]

Hi Rob,

Yes, you are right. GPL3 introduced some additions, in particular for
hosted applications. So, using GPL3 versioned code in a Web app may
not be allowed.

I was indeed not replying to all the possibilities. It's impossible
really to give advice without more information.

Cheers,
Silvia.

[Rex Chung]

Thanks for your quick responses, I'll be contacting you offline.

Rex Chung
CEO and Founder
Ankoder - Video Encoding On Demand
http://www.ankoder.com
--------------------------------------
Sydney: +61 421 591 943
HK: +852 6901 2682
Twitter: @rexchung @ankoder

[Nathan de Vries]

On 25/10/2009, at 12:06 PM, Rob Manson wrote:
> ...your point assumes you're creating a compiled application...which

> is
> possibly the minority of software startups nowadays.

And your point assumes that the GPLs definition of a "derivative work"
applies only to compiled code.

Frankly, nobody knows what constitutes a derivative work with respect
to the GPL. In the compiled world, you've got the static-vs-dynamic
linking debate. In the non-compiled world, you've got projects like
Drupal / Wordpress imposing same-license restrictions on modules/
plugins/themes, claiming they're derivative works.

1989 called and they want their license back.

Cheers,

Nathan de Vries

[Rob Manson]

*cough*flamebait

8P


roBman