kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Javier Serrano <javier.serrano.pareja@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi, as a reminder, here are the texts we proposed:

For schematics symbols and for complete symbol libraries:

"This work is licensed under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 License.
To the extent that circuit schematics that use Licensed Material can be
considered to be ‘Adapted Material’, then the copyright holder waives
article 3.b of the license with respect to these schematics."

For footprints and libraries of footprints:

"This work is licensed under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 License.
To the extent that circuit layout that uses Licensed Material can be
considered to be ‘Adapted Material’, then the copyright holder waives
article 3.b of the license with respect to this layout."

Now I notice that this thread initially dealt with 3D models, which
are neither symbols not footprints. If you see in the proposed texts
above, for dealing with the case of 3D models, we should find an
expression which denotes the complete 3D representation of a circuit,
which uses the licensed 3D models. Any thoughts about what that
expression should be? For example, if the term we use is "3D circuit
model" then the text for licensing the 3D models of components would
be:

"This work is licensed under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 License.
To the extent that a 3D circuit model that uses Licensed Material can be
considered to be ‘Adapted Material’, then the copyright holder waives
article 3.b of the license with respect to this 3D circuit model."

Regarding where to put these notices, there is first a choice that
needs to be made: per component or per repo? I think per component
makes more sense because a component can have a life of its own
outside the original repo, and ideally the license information would
travel with the component wherever it goes. For symbols, the text
could be in a property. For fooprints, it could be a comment in the
"pretty file". For 3D models, I don't know. One could also include a
license file per repo, to make it simpler for users to see it.

I hope this helps. As you see, there are some strategic decisions to
be taken at the project level. Back to you Wayne ;)

Cheers,

Javier


On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> Oliver,
>
> I don't make any claims to be a legal expert but I believe that adding a
> LICENSE file to each repo should suffice.  Perhaps our friends and CERN
> could comment on this if I am mistaken.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Wayne
>
> On 6/28/2017 7:24 AM, Oliver Walters wrote:
> > Wayne, Maciej, et al,
> >
> > This has been sitting in my //todo for a while. Can I get some
> > clarification on the LICENSE issue and then I will ensure it is applied
> > to the repos:
> >
> > Am I correct in my understanding that the following text is ALL that is
> > required (placed within a LICENSE file in each repo)?
> >
> >     "This work is licensed under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0
> License.
> >     To the extent that circuit schematics that use Licensed Material can
> be
> >     considered to be ‘Adapted Material’, then the copyright holder waives
> >     article 3.b of the license with respect to these schematics."
> >
> >
> > Or is this an addendum required to be made and I am required to include
> > the entire CC-BY-SA text?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Oliver
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 6:41 AM, Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx
> > <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> >
> >     I prefer the former.  Adding the license to fields would be
> cumbersome.
> >
> >     Cheers,
> >
> >     Wayne
> >
> >     On 4/10/2017 4:43 PM, Maciej Suminski wrote:
> >     > The easiest way to include the license is to put a file containing
> the
> >     > text in the libraries repository. Alternatively, the text could be
> >     > stored in the 'License' field for symbols or 'Doc' property for
> >     > footprints, but it feels a bit too wordy to me.
> >     >
> >     > Cheers,
> >     > Orson
> >     >
> >     > On 04/07/2017 11:55 AM, Javier Serrano wrote:
> >     >> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Wayne Stambaugh
> >     <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>>
> >     >> wrote:
> >     >>
> >     >>> I'm still waiting for our friends at CERN for an answer on
> library
> >     >>> licensing.  We are leaning towards CC-SA with the use exception
> >     clause.
> >     >>> I turning out to be the longest time ever to write a single
> >     sentence. ;)
> >     >>>
> >     >>
> >     >> OK, better late than never. Here are the proposals:
> >     >>
> >     >> For schematics symbols and for complete symbol libraries:
> >     >>
> >     >> "This work is licensed under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0
> >     License.
> >     >> To the extent that circuit schematics that use Licensed Material
> >     can be
> >     >> considered to be ‘Adapted Material’, then the copyright holder
> waives
> >     >> article 3.b of the license with respect to these schematics."
> >     >>
> >     >> For footprints and libraries of footprints:
> >     >>
> >     >> "This work is licensed under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0
> >     License.
> >     >> To the extent that circuit layout that uses Licensed Material can
> be
> >     >> considered to be ‘Adapted Material’, then the copyright holder
> waives
> >     >> article 3.b of the license with respect to this layout."
> >     >>
> >     >> This assumes we want a "weak copyleft" regime for libraries, i.e.
> >     we want
> >     >> modifications to symbols/footprints/libraries to be published
> >     under the
> >     >> same license, but we don't want to force people to publish their
> >     complete
> >     >> designs under CC-BY-SA just because they used the KiCad
> >     libraries. Then
> >     >> there is the issue of how to embed this information in symbols,
> >     symbol
> >     >> libraries, footprints and footprint libraries. I am not competent
> to
> >     >> comment on that.
> >     >>
> >     >> Cheers,
> >     >>
> >     >> Javier
> >     >>
> >     >>
> >     >>
> >     >> _______________________________________________
> >     >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
> >     >> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
> >     >> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >     <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>
> >     >>
> >     >
> >     > _______________________________________________
> >     > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
> >     > Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
> >     > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >     <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>
> >     >
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
> >     Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers>
> >     More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >     <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>