[Bf-committers] Blender FAQ for Artists and the GPL

[D.J. Capelis]

--- Tom Musgrove <tommusgrove__ at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> I have some suggested changes for the GPL FAQ,
> 
> In a few sentences, what is the GPL?
> 	The GPL license gives endusers additional
> rights that are normally reserved 
> to the copyright holder, such as distributing
> and making copys of work (in 
> this case Blender), make derivative works (ie
> add new features to Blender), 
> and the freedom to sell the work to others. 
> These additional rights are 
> granted as long as the enduser also grants
> these same rights to their 
> endusers under the terms of the GPL, and as
> long as the individual abides by 
> the terms of the GPL.
> 

Originally the document had an answer that was
similar to this, however Ton requested that it be
made a bit more concise and simple (more geared
towards artists), and less focused on how the GPL
differs from EULAs.  Your text is simpler than
mine was though, so who knows?

> 
> and
> 
> 
> 
> Can my organization use Blender internally
> without giving up our valuable 
> changes to our competitors?
> 	The GPL actually does allow your organization
> to use a modified version of 
> Blender internally without offering the
> source-code as long as you do not 
> distribute it outside your company or
> organization.  However, many 
> organizations find it is actually more valuable
> to donate their changes back 
> to the community.  The reason this is so, is
> that maintaining a blender 
> 'branch' with different code changes and
> patches requires maintenaince.  If 
> the patches and changes are donated back to the
> Blender foundation, they can 
> be integrated into blender, thus shifting or
> sharing the cost and burden of 
> maintenance from the corporation.  Thus unless
> the changes are related to 
> the coorporations 'core competency' and is
> expected to provide a clear 
> 'competitive advantage', it is generally
> recommended that the changes be 
> donated back.
> 

We need to remember that this is a document
focused for artists and not focused for
developers.  Perhaps we can find a middle ground
by simply saying: "Blender becomes better because
of valuable code contributions, we encourage your
organization to contribute your code back unless
it is absolutely vital.  However <the current
text>"

> 
> Also, I'm a bit uncomfortable with the wording
> of the answer to
> 
> How does the GPL and Blender benefit me?
> 

Would the wording: "How does the GPL enrich
Blender?" make everyone happy?

> but can't think of alternative wording at the
> moment.
> 
> LetterRip
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at projects.blender.org
>
http://projects.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> 

Thanks,


=====
~D.J. Capelis~
Network Security and Cryptography Researcher.
Lead Developer of FOML:  http://foml.inodetech.com


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. 
www.yahoo.com