Very Computer

by **Precision Farming Proje** » Wed, 09 Oct 1996 04:00:00

Hi All:
I am working for a government department (branch, division,
something like that) that has not been in the "business" of
releasing software. As part of a technology transfer
initiative, we are about to start putting some software out
which is intended for "precision farming" applications, but
is of more general usefulness. Anyone have suggestions on
possible copyright type text to include with the code. We have
a copy of the GPL, and I might have a copy of the Berkeley
copyright.

(Oh, why ask in the Linux newsgroup? All this code is being
developed under Linux (we use GRASS as the GIS), runs on two
department Linux machines, and I run Linux at home. Besides,
I like the "look and feel" of Linux applications.)

Waiting in suspense (or in Edmonton)
Gordon Haverland
Precision Farming Project
Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development

by **Eric Johnso** » Wed, 09 Oct 1996 04:00:00

> Hi All:
> I am working for a government department (branch, division,
> something like that) that has not been in the "business" of
> releasing software. As part of a technology transfer
> initiative, we are about to start putting some software out
> which is intended for "precision farming" applications, but
> is of more general usefulness. Anyone have suggestions on
> possible copyright type text to include with the code. We have
> a copy of the GPL, and I might have a copy of the Berkeley
> copyright.

The Tcl/Tk and X Window System copyrights are less restrictive
than the GPL, but in the end, all three have a similar result
in that they allow others to freely copy the code.

Most of these copyright messages support similar goals:

* Disclaim any liability for anything that happens to end users
with the code, from the code or by the code.

* Allow the code to be copied under certain conditions (mostly
that copiers don't remove your copyright and disclaimer message).
If you require more restrictive conditions, then you need
to clearly state them in the copyright message.

Hope this helps,
-Eric

--
Eric F. Johnson URL:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/efjohnson/
CAMAX Manufacturing Tech., Inc.
7851 Metro Parkway phone: +1 612 854 5300 fax: +1 612 854
6644

by **Allen Krel** » Wed, 09 Oct 1996 04:00:00

> Hi All:
> I am working for a government department (branch, division,
> something like that) that has not been in the "business" of
> releasing software.
> Anyone have suggestions on
> possible copyright type text to include with the code.

The government in the U.S. cannot copyright code. Legally,
everything the government produces is owned by "the people"
and must be made freely available.

Look in any government publication or pamplet, you will not
see a copyright message.

Allen Krell

by **david parso** » Thu, 10 Oct 1996 04:00:00

>> Hi All:
>> I am working for a government department (branch, division,
>> something like that) that has not been in the "business" of
>> releasing software.
>> Anyone have suggestions on
>> possible copyright type text to include with the code.

>The government in the U.S. cannot copyright code.

Yes, but you're talking to someone in Canada, and as much as many people
in the USA treat Canada as a possession, it's still officially a different
country.

A BSD-style copyright is a good start when rolling your own.

____

\/

by **Precision Farming Proje** » Thu, 10 Oct 1996 04:00:00

says...

>> Hi All:
>> I am working for a government department (branch, division,
>> something like that) that has not been in the "business" of
>> releasing software.
>> Anyone have suggestions on
>> possible copyright type text to include with the code.

>The government in the U.S. cannot copyright code. Legally,
>everything the government produces is owned by "the people"
>and must be made freely available.

>Look in any government publication or pamplet, you will not
>see a copyright message.

>Allen Krell

Alberta Agriculture is not in the U.S., it is in Canada
(that country to the north :-). We need to stick some
kind of message in with the code, and since this particular
part of the government hasn't been involved in releasing
code like this before, I thought I would get some outside
thoughts on the matter. The intention of the project is
to get precision farming more accepted in the (agricultural)
market, and if this means releasing good code to help consultants
get the jobs done, well then we will release good code.
However, funding is still a problem, and we have to justify
our presence. Getting acknowledgments from industry is
one way to do this. If we just release the code with no
copying restrictions, then people can use the code without
acknowledging our work, and ...

Does that clarify things?

Gordon Haverland
Precision Farming Project
Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development
Edmonton, Alberta, CANADA

by **Fred Fi** » Sat, 12 Oct 1996 04:00:00

Quote:> I am working for a government department (branch, division,
> something like that) ... we are about to start putting some software
> out ... Anyone have suggestions on possible copyright type text to
> include with the code. We have a copy of the GPL, and I might have
> a copy of the Berkeley copyright.

If you are a government employee, then you are being paid to develop
software by us taxpayers, therefore we (collectively) own the code I
believe. This means the code is public domain and should be released
without any copyright at all.

-Fred

--
CRONUS -- 1840 E. Warner Road #105-265 -- Tempe, AZ 85284 -- USA
Voice: (800) 804-0833 -- (602) 491-0442 -- FAX: (602) 491-0048

Ftp site: ftp.ninemoons.com

by **Phillip G Ezol** » Sat, 12 Oct 1996 04:00:00

Excerpts from netnews.comp.os.linux.development.apps: 11-Oct-96 Re:

Quote:> If you are a government employee, then you are being paid to develop
> software by us taxpayers, therefore we (collectively) own the code I
> believe. This means the code is public domain and should be released
> without any copyright at all.

I wish that that was true. For NASA at least, all of the software that
you write.. (I say that with protest...), can also be sold again through
some Nasa software agency. It is a crime.

Phil

by **Paul Schmid** » Sat, 12 Oct 1996 04:00:00

: > I am working for a government department (branch, division,
<snip>
: If you are a government employee, then you are being paid to develop
: software by us taxpayers, therefore we (collectively) own the code I
: believe. This means the code is public domain and should be released
: without any copyright at all.

Perhaps the Canadian government feels that Canadians own it, not
the entire world. Copyright simply establishes ownership; Licensing
establishes who may use a product and how. Placing a product in the
Public domain means that the author has waived any right to control
a product. The fact that the ownership belongs to a government
doesn't mean that protection is not appropriate.

A properly-written license doesn't have to involve monetary compensation,
particularly in the case of citizens having license to use software
developed by their own tax money. I suspect, however, that those
citizens probably wouldn't be too happy about a licensing agreement (or
no licensing protection) which would permit <fill in name of hostile
government> and <fill in name of terrorist group> to use, for example,
their latest defense system software without restriction or cost.

Just my $.02
--

Amateur Radio K9PS PGP key at http://www.custom.net/pschmidt
ARRL Life Member fingerprint: 24 9F D3 BD AE E3 50 72
QCWA Life Member 26711 23 AB A0 64 BB 9E 2B 8D

by **John Hasl** » Sun, 13 Oct 1996 04:00:00

Quote:Paul Schmidt writes:
> I suspect, however, that those
> citizens probably wouldn't be too happy about a licensing agreement (or
> no licensing protection) which would permit <fill in name of hostile
> government> and <fill in name of terrorist group> to use, for example,
> their latest defense system software without restriction or cost.

You expect terrorists to honor licensing agreements? Would you stop
car-bombs by requiring all purchasers of ammonium nitrate to sign a
contract agreeing not to make bombs?

Only secrecy will work for the situation you describe.

Or do you mean that it would be ok for the terrorists to use the software
as long as they pay for it and don't make unauthorized copies?
--

John Hasler This posting is in the public domain.

Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind.
Elmwood, Wisconsin

Very Computer

Copyrights (any good ones?)

Copyrights (any good ones?)

Copyrights (any good ones?)

Copyrights (any good ones?)

Copyrights (any good ones?)

Copyrights (any good ones?)

Copyrights (any good ones?)

Copyrights (any good ones?)

Copyrights (any good ones?)

Copyrights (any good ones?)