1.links.org (4792B)
1 * links (17/09/24) (19/09/24) 2 ** papers and people (19/09/24) 3 *** very helpful (19/09/24) (24/09/24) 4 - a colection of all or richard stallmans paper's [https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fsfs/rms-essays.pdf] (first published in 2002, updated 2004) 5 - a paper written by Nicolas Jullien (prof. at IMT) comparing and contrasting open vs proprietary software [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2559454_Open-Source_vs_Proprietary_Software] 6 - the gnu manifesto [https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html] the start of the moddern free software movement, the first time the terms was 7 properly used 8 *** rather helpful (19/09/24) 9 - lawrence lessig is a researcher of law and political acitavist who has been tied with open/free software 10 for a long time, he is the editor of the stallman papers [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Lessig] 11 - larry wall, he is the designer of the perl language, and is pretty influental in the open soures space, 12 he has done work with UC berkeley. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Wall] 13 *** of minor note (19/09/24) 14 - edward snowden, leaked NSA documents, while not about the licneses very much about keeping things open and avalible, 15 a paper writen on the effects of his actions can be seen here [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275019554_The_Consequences_of_Edward_Snowden_NSA_Related_Information_Disclosures] 16 ** licenses (17/09/24) (19/09/24) 17 *** open (17/09/24) (19/09/24) 18 - MIT [https://opensource.org/license/MIT] 19 restriction free, or there abouts, it makes the developers non liable for any damaged caused because of the software 20 - GPL V3 [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html] 21 all about keeping the users freedom, by forcing software licensed with it to remain in an opensource form, meaning it cannot 22 be relicensed 23 - GPL V2 [https://opensource.org/license/gpl-2-0] 24 much the same as the GPL V3 but it can have a few differences specifically towards internationalization 25 DRM and patents. 26 it is often seen as controversal however due to some of its changes a video of linus talking about it 27 can be found here [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaKIZ7gJlRU] 28 - LGPL V3 [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.en.html] 29 the LGPL is like the name says it is a lesser version of the GPL, it can be relicensed under any license 30 it can be used as a smaller part of nonfree software unlike the GPL 31 can require nonfree software as a dependacy. 32 - LGPL V2.1 [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.en.html] 33 much the same as the V3 but without the changes to patents and other things like that 34 for ideas on the 2.1 vs 3 its much the same as GPL V2 to V3 35 - AGPL V3 [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html] 36 the AGPL provides much the same as the GPL however it has an added clause for servers/networked machines 37 if a fork of an AGPL project pushes an update to its users, it must be made avalible in source form 38 for both anyone. EXAMPLE, ive made a mesaging app under AGPL, another person forks it and adds 39 the ability to send images, they must make the code relvent to that open and avalible to avoid 40 my project becoming obsolete 41 - BSD 3 clause [https://opensource.org/license/BSD-3-clause] 42 - BSD 2 clause [https://opensource.org/license/bsd-2-clause] 43 - BSD 4 clause [https://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-4-clause/] 44 *** propritery (17/09/24) 45 - AFPL [https://web.mit.edu/ghostscript/www/Public.htm#fulltext] 46 - CC by nc [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/] 47 - traditional copyright [see your countrys laws for more] 48 - MicroSoft software license [https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/microsoft-software-license-terms-e26eedad-97a2-5250-2670-aad156b654bd] 49 - apple licenses [https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/] 50 - google corporate license [https://cla.developers.google.com/about/google-corporate] 51 *** no license 52 - some projects are under no license which is a similar effect to open source licences 53 54 ** news storys and intresting events 55 - an open letter to hobbyist [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists], this 56 letter from bill gates to open source software developers, complain in simple terms. 57 the letter was mostly in reference to people pirating copys of basic 58 it claims that no one has the time to develope software and distribute for free, and anyone 59 who isnt paying for their software is a theif. the reaction of this was software went to 60 a new licensing format (which we still use today) of pre paid licenses when the hardware 61 is brought. although never directly said, in the marketing for the apple 1, it was a key 62 selling point, that its version of basic was free.