| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 21.02.04 17:39l 274 Lines 10552 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 2886-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Feb 19, 5/5
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0SIF<DB0EA<DB0ACC<DB0GOS<DB0EEO<DB0RES<ON0BEL<JK1ZRW<
WB0TAX<VE2HAR<ZL2BAU<ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 040221/1359Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:19579 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:2886-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: Re: APRS Map Manager Submittals
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:03:07 -0500
X-Message-Number: 30
Summary:
Submitted maps should be also submitted under the terms of the GPL to remain
within the spirit of the GPL of the underlying project.
Discussion below:
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 17:34:42 -0500, Steve Dimse wrote:
>On 2/19/04 at 5:23 PM Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net> sent:
>>OK, then why not change the phrase
>>
>>"and agree to its unlimited distribution by aprs.net" to: "and
>>agree to its unlimited distribution"
>>
>Because that forces the user to give away all the rights.
But it was >you< that said the project was going to be under the GPL, not
me. That is >exactly< what the GPL does and you can't have it both ways and
remain in the spirit of GPL.
A phrase like this would work and would be consistent with your claim APRS
Map Manager will be a GPL project:
"and agree to its unlimited distribution under the terms of the GPL license"
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt
BTW, you are not "forcing" anyone to give away any rights. They chose to
participate in this project. Personally, I am more likely to participate if
I know someone else could pick up all the pieces and run a APRS MM if they
so chose.
>I will change it to APRS Map Manager
You call it tomato I call it tomatoe. Why not change the license for the
(custom) submitted maps to match the GPL license for the software? Then it
is a 100% solution, and if you got hit with a bus, someone else could setup
a server without a question of property rights of custom submitted maps.
>>I understand the rest of your monologue about copyright and
>>liability issues. It was conferring rights to your property
>>aprs.net, and not the larger GPL community that raised the
>>question.
>>
>OK, but again, I am not going to force anyone to conform to any
>specific license terms other than letting me place them on APRS MM.
If your going to do a GPL project, then you need to do a GPL project. You
can't be a little pregnant and you can't be a little GPL project. Yes yes,
I know that some for-profit manufactures skirt the GPL by using non-GPL
code as separate drivers/modules then GPL code, but I don't think that
applies here. Hence, my thought the entire project should be GPL, not just
half of it.
BTW, I'm >not< trying to discourage you or get in your way. Your certainly
free to do things any way you wish. It was just my understanding, with this
project, someone could, without your permission, decide to set up and run a
APRS MMr that could be just as good as the APRS MM you run.
That is what GPL meant to me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS Map Manager Submittals
From: Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:15:02 -0500
X-Message-Number: 31
On 2/19/04 at 6:03 PM Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net> sent:
>Summary:
>Submitted maps should be also submitted under the terms of the GPL to remain
>within the spirit of the GPL of the underlying project.
>
>Discussion below:
>>Because that forces the user to give away all the rights.
>
>But it was >you< that said the project was going to be under the GPL, not me.
>That is >exactly< what the GPL does and you can't have it both ways and
>remain in the spirit of GPL.
The project software is released under the GPL, the database itself is
released under the GPL, however I do not have the rights to the maps, not
do I have the right to demand the owners of the map release them under the
GPL.
Nor do I need to. Just as GPL'ed software may be linked to non-GPL'ed
software, so too may someone have code that accesses a map which is not
GPL, and a GPL database may contain data on things things which are not
GPL.
>A phrase like this would work and would be consistent with your claim APRS
>Map Manager will be a GPL project:
>
>"and agree to its unlimited distribution under the terms of the GPL license"
>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt
Yes, it would work, but it requires map makers to submit to a specific set
of conditions, which in fact, in most cases will be more restrictive than
the way most maps are released, into the public domain under NO license.
Furthermore, some maps may not be capable of meeting the terms of the GPL,
for example I do not know if WinAPRS maps allow embedded comments, if not
you could not have the license notice required to be compliant with the
GPL.
This would also force the includion of a notice within all the existing
maps, which is a lot of work and as I say, in many cases will restrict the
rights users have over those maps.
>BTW, you are not "forcing" anyone to give away any rights. They chose to=
>participate in this project. Personally, I am more likely to participate if I
>know someone else could pick up all the pieces and run a APRS MM if they so
>chose.
>
>>I will change it to APRS Map Manager
>
>You call it tomato I call it tomatoe. Why not change the license for the
>(custom) submitted maps to match the GPL license for the software?
After a little more consideration I have said "within APRS". The reasons I
don say GPL are those outlined above.
>Then it is
>a 100% solution, and if you got hit with a bus, someone else could setup a
>server without a question of property rights of custom submitted maps.
Except it provides additional restriction on the user.
>>>I understand the rest of your monologue about copyright and
>>>liability issues. It was conferring rights to your property
>>>aprs.net, and not the larger GPL community that raised the
>>>question.
>>>
>>OK, but again, I am not going to force anyone to conform to any
>>specific license terms other than letting me place them on APRS MM.
>
>If your going to do a GPL project, then you need to do a GPL project. You
>can't be a little pregnant and you can't be a little GPL project. Yes yes, I
>know that some for-profit manufactures skirt the GPL by using non-GPL code as
>separate drivers/modules then GPL code, but I don't think that applies here.
I disagree strongly. The code and database are separate entities and can be
separated, and as I say, almost all of the maps we are talking about are
currently released into the public domain, I see no reason to force
additional restrictions upon map authors!
Steve K4HG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS Map Manager Submittals
From: Adi Linden <adil@adis.on.ca>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 17:18:59 -0600 (CST)
X-Message-Number: 32
>It can be either way. For example, if you have a geo file for a radar, that
>image will change, so you would submit just the geo file. On the other hand, if
>you had produced an image with mapserver, you would upload both the geo file
and>the image file.
That answers the question I didn't ask yet :) I will upload a Toporama map
(one single sample) later. If it's suitable, I have all of Canada...
Adi
--
Adi Linden | va3adi | va3adi@adis.ca | http://adis.ca
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
IRLP Node 2590 in Sioux Lookout, Ontario
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: MAP Converter?
From: Curt Mills <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:55:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Message-Number: 33
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004, Henk de Groot wrote:
>I can most certainly start hacking to support AprsDOS maps as input, but I
>rather avoid it. Does somebody have a converter to convert AprsDOS maps to
>WinAPRS? That would save me a lot of time.
I'm sure you know of this option, but I'll say it anyway: The Xastir
project "map_dos.c" file handles both of those formats. You should be able
to figure out a converter by examining that code. I hope you find another
option first though, as it would still be a bit of a pain to do so.
--
Curt, WE7U. archer at eskimo dot com
http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math. - unknown
Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates. - WE7U.
The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS Map Manager Submittals
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 23:23:20 -0500
X-Message-Number: 34
Well, we are running far afield here so it is best to look at what I said
first regarding your request on http://mm.aprs.net/submit.html regarding
custom user generated maps. It was:
"I created this map, hold the copyrights to it, and agree to its unlimited
distribution by aprs.net"
and I suggested, in the spirit of the GPL, you change it to:
"I created this map, hold the copyrights to it, and agree to its unlimited
distribution"
What is the problem with that?
If the project is supposed to be in the GPL, then this would be in that same
spirit that the maps are available to all in the project instead of just
being licensed to Steve Dimse/aprs.net Openess and sharing in the spirit of
the GPL I am talking about. APRS.NET is your property and if I contribute a
map to this project, I want to make it available to everyone in the project,
not just for your personal use.
One other point
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:15:02 -0500, Steve Dimse wrote:
>On 2/19/04 at 6:03 PM Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net> sent:
>>BTW, you are not "forcing" anyone to give away any rights. They
>>chose to participate in this project. Personally, I am more likely
>>to participate if I know someone else could pick up all the pieces
>>and run a APRS MM if they so chose.
>>>I will change it to APRS Map Manager
>>You call it tomato I call it tomatoe. Why not change the license
>>for the (custom) submitted maps to match the GPL license for the
>>software?
>After a little more consideration I have said "within APRS". The
>reasons I don say GPL are those outlined above.
"within APRS" is not public domain and certainly not a restriction you can
expect to use in the context of a GPL project.
For what it is worth, there is a whole world out there that can use
affordable technologies like this. The handicapped, rural school districts,
consumers, disadvantage areas, etc etc. Why anyone would want to restrict its
use to Rich Old White Men who like to Play Radio, is beyond me, but to each
their own.
I think we can agree to disagree, I pointed out what I wanted to, and you can
do with it as you may.
73
Jeff
---
END OF DIGEST
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
