| I believe this thread brings to light an ongoing concern I have over licensing (actually the lack thereof) of work and information related to Backgammon that is currently available.
--------------- PRE-AMBLE --------------- Disclaimer: I write code for many Open Source projects, and have done so for eons (GNUBG is only one such project). I don't wish this post be political (Yes, Tim Chow that is for you!), however I think it is beneficial to understand the bias that I would have in suggesting a license I'd personally like to see. The suggestion I will give below is not one I am asking for or forcing anyone else adopt. It is the one I use when someone asks to reuse data (or webpages) I have generated. Generally I have an explicit license on such thins (Especially on any open Wiki's I create for myself). In the absence of an explicit license, anything I generate can be assumed to be the same license. So what is my philosophy? Richard Stallman sums it up pretty well. "I believe that all generally useful information should be free. By 'free' I am not referring to price, but rather to the freedom to copy the information and to adapt it to one's own uses... When information is generally useful, redistributing it makes humanity wealthier no matter who is distributing and no matter who is receiving." Yes, there are some who say that's political. That is MY VIEW, and I respect that others have opposing views. ------------------------------- MY PREFERRED LICENSE ------------------------------- Given my view above, one can assume I prefer (and use) a license that follows a similar philosophy. That license can be found at this link: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
There are occasions where I use a non commercial version of this (but NOT for data and publications related to Backgammon). That can be found here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
The second one limits derivative works to non commercial use. ---------------------------------- WHAT DO I REALLY WANT? ---------------------------------- I'd like to see the community who produces data (and or collects) to explicitly start making the license of usage known. This way, I'd know how I can use such data. The license one chooses is not something that really concerns me, but that an ACTUAL license appears. It becomes much clearer what the expectations of those submitting the data to any project are, and how that data can be used by others. If I was asked to work on a project, I would have a personal preference for something that is similar to the first one above. But that is MY preference. I am NOT asking that others believe they should adopt what I believe. HOWEVER, given how a lot of data is handled, this type of license would not be a far cry from how many already feel about backgammon data in general (ie rollouts, Depreli study etc). ----------------- CONCLUSION ----------------- Projects that produce valuable data for the Backgammon community should be accompanied by the license that covers its usage, so that the community doesn't have to guess, or do a lot of research. It allows people to make an informed decision. |
