Conversation

Notices

1. Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Saturday, 12-Jan-2019 08:50:09 UTC Strypey

   During the NZGOAL consultation process, I argued that the appropriate default license to recommend would be #CCBYSA. When any work is created at public expense, its public service maintainers ought to be allowed improve it by incorporating any fixes or additions made in derivative versions, especially commercial derivatives. I argued for GPL as the default license recommendation for NZGOAL-SE, for the same reason. As did #NZOpenSourceSociety President Dave Lane.

   • Adonay Felipe Nogueira repeated this.
   • Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Saturday, 12-Jan-2019 09:11:16 UTC Strypey

     in reply to

     Sadly, and perhaps because of the political circumstances, the default suggested in NZGOAL is #CCBY. This laissez-faire license means, for example, that map companies can sell corrected maps based on the publicly-funded NZ map data shared under CC BY by #LINZ (Land Information New Zealand), but LINZ would need to ask permission to incorporate those map corrections back into the public dataset (used in #OpenStreetMap). This is something I'd like to see fixed, by changing the default to #CCBYSA.

     Adonay Felipe Nogueira repeated this.
   • Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Saturday, 12-Jan-2019 09:17:19 UTC Strypey

     in reply to

     The situation in NZGOAL Software Edition is somewhat better. Public service agencies are advised to license any modifications to an existing codebase under the license the upstream codebase uses, even when they're not legally obliged to (ie a non-copyleft license). When licensing new software, they're advised to use either #GPL (v3+) or "#MIT", and to consider #LGPL or #AGPL where appropriate.

     Adonay Felipe Nogueira repeated this.
   • Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Saturday, 12-Jan-2019 09:22:08 UTC Strypey

     in reply to

     I'd still prefer a #copyleft license (GPL, LGPL, or AGPL as appropriate) to be the default recommendation. I don't see why we ought to allow companies to build proprietary software on top of publicly-funded #FreeCode. Why not oblige them to make their source code available to their users, and allow their fixes and addition to be incorporated back into the upstream versions maintained by public service agencies or open source communities?

     Adonay Felipe Nogueira repeated this.