OPENCORES.ORG

J.C. Wren wrote:

My opinion on this.
I also feel a developer should have some amount of control over his sources.
Actually, I have myself been wary of posting my projects on opencores
for the fear of copyright infringement. I have downloaded sources from
opencores but only to enhance my knowledge of VHDL and digital design.
I respect peoples intellectual property and refrain from using their
sources but  I can not speak for other takers. With no system to check
a source's use, the chances of exploitation and infringement are more.
There are too many e-mails requesting for "free rides" already.

What I propose is this :

1) Ability to restrict access to selected files.
2) Implementation of a concrete licensing policy.
3) Verifying and Accepting a designers ownership of a source.

For instance, if I write a core for a vocoder, I would like only
select files to be available "openly". Like say, an FFT module or a
blockram module. The main vocoder module will be available only
through a license.

If a person wants to see the whole vocoder source, he applies for a
license, which is free of course. Now, this licensing should provide
some information about the "taker" like if it is meant for commercial
use, whether the source is working for a govt agency or at a uni,
etc.. If I am not satisfied I can refuse the license.

Lastly, when I claim the source is mine, it should be checked with
other opencores, and my ownership be accepted only if it does not
trespass any copyright limitaions. Once approved, it is placed in the
OC repo. If another person builds upon my code or uses a part of my
core then I should be referenced for that part of the code, like the
BSD license.

What do you feel about this.

Regads,
Abhijit
On 4/15/06, Günter Dannoritzer <dannoritzer@w...> wrote:
> J.C. Wren wrote:
>
> > That would seem to pretty much defeat the purpose of calling it "Open
> > Cores".  I have tinkered around with a number of the cores out there,
> > from implementing them in toy designs (I am not a professional VHDL
> > developer), to just learning how a particular function is done.  To have
> > to email an unresponsive author just to browse the code is not just a
> > bad idea, it's insane.
> >
>
> The question is where you put the emphasis on. Do you focus on the taker
> or the giver? OpenCores only works if you have giver, than you can have
> taker. I don't think it is insane if the giver has a right to chose.
>
> But let me clarify something. My idea is to have additional features
> that allow a developer to chose what happens with its code. This does
> not rule out that the developer says everyone can access it as it is
> now. Probably most people would do that anyway.
>
> There are cores hosted that other companies charge thousands of dollar
> for. Why not give those developers a choice?
>
> I don't think that a community like this can afford to have potential
> contributors like Rudi walk away without caring about it.
>
> This email feature was only an idea. I am just trying to think about a
> way to encourage more contribution and keep contributors happy. One
> would be to give a developer more options to chose from.
>
> What are your ideas about getting more contributors to this community
> and how to make them stay?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Guenter
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores
>