Open-source license

[leouieda]

@kwinkunks, I see that the license text present in the repo is the Apache license. I'm not very well versed in the dark arts (copyright law), but wouldn't a BSD or MIT license be a bit simpler and less restrictive? Specially since the readers of The Leading Edge are probably primarily from industry (and might want to use the code on their software).

Just to kick off a discussion ;)

Good reads on this point are:

• Text by John Hunter (creator of matplotlib) about the advantages of BSD over GPL: http://nipy.sourceforge.net/software/license/johns_bsd_pitch.html#johns-bsd-pitch
• Discussion on the yt project blog about their move from GPL to BSD: http://blog.yt-project.org/post/Relicensing.html

[kwinkunks]

@leouieda Into the minefield! I like permissive licenses — I'm totally with you on the GPL point — so almost any of those in the BSD, MIT, Apache style are a better choice, in my opinion. So we're in the right ballpark, though they all meet the Open Source Definition, for what it's worth.

One advantage of the Apache license is its 'patent termination' provision (clause 3), which most (all?) others lack. Its main disadvantage is its length, the flip side of which is comprehensiveness — probably the reason Google prefers it over the short-and-sweet BSD-style for projects like Android. Even the FSF prefers it! Another business-oriented advantage is the protection of names and trademarks in derived works. For these reasons, I think of it as being the most business-friendly of the permissive (non-viral) licenses. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.

Some thoughts:

• I think we do need to sort this out, and SEG should play a role in helping navigate this area. Not that they need to recommend licenses per se, just help people decide.
• Moving these tutorials to single repos would give people the flexibility to use what they prefer.
• It would be interesting to do a survey of licenses used by commercial vs academic projects. I heard that Statoil required the use of GPL on one of its open source projects. There's a good start to such a dataset here.
• I know there are people in the SEG community who are familiar with all of these arguments, e.g. Joe Dellinger. We should meet up on Hangouts for a chat some time.
• We should probably get a lawyer's opinion :)

Last thing: here's chapter 2 from O'Reilly's book Understanding Open Source and Free Software Licensing. Worth a read. And there's more at O'Reilly.

[leouieda]

• OK, I hadn't realized that particular advantage of the Apache.
• I agree that input from SEG and the community is crucial.
• I also like the idea of individual licenses for each tutorial.
• There could be a set of "recommended" licenses (and why choose each one) to accompany the author instructions.