Re: [kDev] Licences for Kendra stuff...

[Daniel Harris <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Philip and All,

At 10:34 05/11/01 -0800, Phillip Temple wrote:
>Code: Free, under GPL if you want though I wouldn't
>advise it as this restricts commercial use (try LGPL),
>to attract new developers (they will want example
>source code to play with).

We do need people to incorporate any code we produce into free (open 
source) software and non-free (closed source) software. By the way Richard 
Stallman corrected me on using the word "commercial" when talking about 
non-free software. I'm sure (hope) he wont mind me quoting him here:

Richard Stallman wrote:
>By the way, I think I see a sign of a common confusion in those words
>of yours.  Free software and commercial software are not opposites; in
>fact, they are orthogonal criteria.  A program is free if its license
>gives the user certain freedoms; a program is commercial if it is
>connected with a business.  The two criteria are independent.  A
>commercial program may be free or nonfree, according to its license.
>A noncommercial program may be free or nonfree, according to its
>license.

Anyway, back on the code license I'm pretty happy with just giving the 
stuff away with no restrictions apart from other people not claiming 
ownership and then suing us for using their code! Any other pitfalls?

I'm not being blase here. Our agenda is to get our ideas out there and 
used. The least restrictions we put on our ideas the more likely everybody 
will be keen to uptake. Will this attract developers?

>It's only worth licensing
>full solutions.

I don't understand that as we're not going to have a "full" solution until 
we come to the end of the project. That's by the very definition of what 
we're trying to do. So, we need to be able to break what we're doing down 
into chunks, I guess.

>Content: Is this under our control?

Agreed, licensing for content made by music, video, etc makers is not 
anything to do with Kendra. But we may end up, for trial purposes at least, 
building databases of metadata, personal details - not source code and not 
multimedia content. These databases may need to be open (public) or closed 
(private) depending on what encourages people to enter their details. For 
example, people generally like to keep their email addresses private. I 
have no problem with anonymous lurkers listening on email lists. I do have 
an issue with anonymous talkers, however.

>Protocols: If it's not free and standardised it has no
>chance of being adopted

Right! Is there still a licence involved somewhere? And, if so, how is it 
worded?

>> "KENDRA" stands for "KEndra's Not kenDRA" ;-)
>
>Ah but if the GNU name is under the GPL then by doing
>this you will have to release the KENDRA name under
>the same license as a derivative work...

You are joking, right? I can't tell if you don't put that smiley face ;-) 
there.

Would GNU have copyrighted the very genre of recursive acronyms? I think 
not. Thankfully, I found this on the GNU website just now:
http://www.gnu.org/gnu/thegnuproject.html
Richard Stallman writes: The name GNU was chosen following a hacker 
tradition, as a recursive acronym for "GNU's Not Unix."

So, phew, there was *prior art*! Anyway, surely, the proposed Kendra 
acronym is a new strain - possibly described as a *self referencing 
recursive acronym*, yes? ;-)

>How about: Knowledge E-rena for the Networked Digital
>Rights Age (ok, bit naff)

Yeah right... ;-/

>> I kind of like that because, so many times, just
>> when I think I know what
>> Kendra is, it changes before my very eyes...
>
>Hmmm, that is not a good sign. You should set a
>roadmap with milestones and try and work towards
>achieving each one. Or am I missing the spirit of
>things?

Actually, I think it's a really good sign, a sign of health and vitality. 
One must be able to change with the times - and time changes constantly. To 
clarify: the end goal for Kendra is clear, static and fixed. To be a system 
that enables the fulfillment of the mantra "I want what I want, when I want 
and I want to (be able to) pay for it" - the "be able to" bit was added by 
Steve Kennedy at the last meeting over a pint.

Now, the Kendra system is not fully known. No one has built it fully yet. 
It doesn't yet exist in whole - only in parts. Only whole in our 
imagination, if that. So, as we create it (make it whole) using our 
*initiative* and, as more people come into the project with their own 
angles on what it should be, so it will change and constantly so. Hmmm?

Yes, we need "a roadmap with milestones" but because we have not walked the 
full length of the "road" we can only go as far as we can see and then plot 
the course from there. In fact, this is all any one or group does in real 
life: we continually revise our methods/destination based on feedback from 
the real world. In Kendra's case the destination is fixed so we need to 
constantly update our methods to best suit the arrival at the end goal the 
quickest. Constantly questioning: will this (action) work to get us closer 
to Kendra.

>> You heard it here first, listeners... ;-)
>
>Listeners? Do we have a KENDRA radio station yet? (as
>ever, content is the bummer. Installing a copy of
>Shoutcast takes 5 mins)

Not yet! But I have been trying to get live Parliament up for ages on the 
Kendra Network Trial. It would be really great for publicity. Well, truth 
is, I've been trying to get technical people to do it and I just don't have 
the time to keep chasing. Need self motivators!

Cheers Daniel