OPENCORES.ORG

>
>> > What Mr. Herveille wrote:
>> > >As an addition to Rudi's points, we need to define a
>> derivative work.
>> > >In my opinion the final derivative work is a finished chip. The
>>
>> no, a derivative work is a modified version of the code.
>>
>> The GDSII file, .sdf and other are "results". The status of
>> the final chip is quite special : it's a tangible thing so
>> not cover by copyright law. But it still a result of
>> copyright material.
>
> This is the way you see it. But that doesn't mattter.
> All that matters is what will hold up in court.

I know i have read enough from RMS, from lawyer her in France, and so on.

> Any I can argue that a chip, based on some piece of open source IP, is
> derived from that piece of IP. And thus it is a derivative work.

A derivative work is not a concept of the GPL. This is a concept inside
the copyright law.

If there is a "mechanical" transformation between A and B, from the point
of view of the law, it's quite the same thing. That's why GPL speak about
prefered form of work, because source code is more usable.

>
> This is exactly the point all these discussions are about.
> It is not clear. You interpret it this way, I can argue/interpret it that
> way.
> We need a CLEAR license.

sur.

>
>> > >documentation of the chip should clearly provide credits and the
>> > >disclaimer. So if anybody uses a chip containing open
>> source IP on a
>> > >board, the board's documentation does not need to provide
>> credits and
>> > >the  disclaimer.
>>
>> Please, no flame like in the X11 project ! :)
>
> Eh? Que?
> What's wrong with what I just stated??
>

I'm just kinding about the flame war after the change of the licence of
X11 that create the fork "Xorg".

>> In fact, we need 2 kinds of licence. BSD one and LGPL like
>> one to make every one happy. (i never wrote code that a
>> compagny could reused without contributing back, there
>> contribution is for me the little fee to use my code, that's
>> quite few comparre to usual closed licence)
>
> I am using BSD style licenses and I can assure you I am getting plenty of
> feedback from commercial companies.
>

I imagine that most compagny are not bad guys. But bad guys still existe.
And you could also find some compagny which are hurt by providinge good
quality code for free. All compagnies are not like IBM. There is also
compagny like Sigma Design.

i understand that some people prefer to work with BSD licence, that the
choice of the programmer.

> Cheers,
> Richard
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores
>