kicad-developers team mailing list archive

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

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 3:27 AM, Oliver Walters <
oliver.henry.walters@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Wayne, others,
>
> A lot of input here, thanks everyone.
>
> Based on the suggestions above, my proposal is as follows:
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------
>
> symbols licence file:
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------
> Copyright (C) 2017 KiCad
>
>
 I agree with Simon that "KiCad" cannot be the copyright holder. Imagine
for the sake of argument I need to contact the copyright holder. Say I
would like to negotiate with him/her a change of licence. I want to use the
material without being subject to the CC-BY-SA licence, and I am willing to
pay for it. So I'd like to benefit from some kind of dual-licensing scheme,
whereby I receive e.g. a copy of a 3D model file with a special licence
just for me. Only the copyright holder can do that. Now I go to the file
and I read "Copyright KiCad." Who should I speak to? Who has the right to
do what I need? That's just an example. For any action where you would need
the copyright holder to do something, you'd bump against the same issue.
One could conceivably define KiCad as a valid legal entity, and then you
could have KiCad be the copyright holder, as the FSF is the copyright
holder of lots of code, but that's a strategic change to be discussed, I
guess, with the project leader and the project initiator. Right now, KiCad
cannot be the holder of any copyright. The same applies, IMHO, to "KiCad
developers."

Cheers,

Javier