From: nghia p. <ngh...@gm...> - 2011-06-13 04:35:35
|
Hello David, If one develop a customised proprietary peripheral (hardware and firmware) to work with OpenBTS, he will have to release the mods he made on OpenBTS to make it work on his peripheral. But does he have to release his hardware and firmware source? How "far" does a AGPL code contaminate other proprietary code? Thanks Nghia 2011/6/12 David Burgess <da...@ra...> > > One goal of GPL is to make source code available to the users of software. > The standard GPL achieves this goal in cases where the user of the software > is actually in possession of the hardware that is running it, but does not > achieve that goal for software that provides service over a network, since > the network operator could obtain software under GPL and then treat it as > proprietary for all practical purposes. The "Affero" clause of the AGPL > ends this practice by giving the remote user specific rights. The original > example of such a case was in the world of web-based services, but the > principle (and language of AGPL) apply to digital telephone networks equally > well. (If you don't want to take my word for it, then go ask an IP lawyer.) > The OpenBSC project has also changed its license to AGPL and for the same > reason. > > So if you allow a phone to attach to your public-release AGPLv3 system, you > must notify the handset user of his/her rights under AGPLv3. The easiest > way to do this is to use the "welcome message" mechanism to send the phone a > text message when it first attaches to the system containing a URL to a site > where the code and license are available. The openbts.sf.net is offered > as an example, but you can provide your own, and *must* provide your own if > you have modifications that deviate from the standard public release. > Another option is to limit access to the system to users who can be > notified of their rights through other mechanisms (like in writing). > > NOTE: If you are running a rogue BTS with the AGPLv3 OpenBTS, you are not > only violating your local criminal laws, but you are also in violation of > the AGPLv3 license. > > > On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:28 AM, keith wrote: > > Hi all, > > I would appreciate it if somebody would give me a pointer to the meaning of > the word NORMALLY > in this comment line in OpenBTS.config.example, referring to the > OpenRegistrationWelcomeMessage parameter. > > # THIS MESSAGE IS NORMALLY REQUIRED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH AGPLv3. > Control.OpenRegistrationWelcomeMessage Welcome to OpenBTS! AGPLv3 > openbts.sf.net. Your IMSI is > > Also, what parts of the message are required? > Is the name OpenBTS required? > Is the link to sf.net required? > I assume sending the IMSI is not part of AGPL? > > Thanks and please don't consider me lazy, I am absolutely allergic to > reading legalese, GPLs included, but if you were to point me to the relevant > section of ACPLv3, I will do my own homework from there. > > Many thanks! > > > k. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content > authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image > Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev_______________________________________________ > Openbts-discuss mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbts-discuss > > > David A. Burgess, CTO > Range Networks, Inc. > +17072082622 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content > authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image > Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Openbts-discuss mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbts-discuss > > |