21–30 of 39 posts
The blog author just wrote another post which was essentially a hatchet job on a 'rival' software package. One of the major differences between his software kallisto and the rival Salmon was the license - Salmon has a GNU General Public License.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure that's so true. Everyone enjoys a good argument over what license the author should have used. ) I do get what you're saying but I think people discuss positive things all the time on even the worst sites. Admitting you're wrong isn't all that novel, but the changing of license is.
So you're saying I'm wrong?
Some context: The blog author just wrote another post which was essentially a hatchet job on a 'rival' software package. One of the major differences between his software kallisto and the rival Salmon was the license - Salmon has a GNU General Public License.
[1] https://liorpachter.wordpress.com/2015/05/26/pachters-p-valu...
Good to see this change, but I wish people wouldn't go down this road to begin with. Speaking as someone who sits in industry now, I have found it almost impossible to successfully conclude negotiations between not-very-interested academics who don't really understand how licensing works (and the staff who supposedly help them) and a big, paranoid company. When you put some rando commercial license or complicated ter…
> I believed then, and still do now, that it’s right that institutions that support software development should benefit from its commercial use (UC Berkeley receives 2/3 of the royalties for commercially licensed products), that students are entitled to renumeration for software engineering work that does not directly support of their own research goals, and that funds are needed to support specialized personnel who can maintain/improve code and service user requests.
Also i believe, most students in academia are under-paid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of my least favorite experiences in grad school was dealing with our school's tech transfer office. They fought hard to avoid using the GPL for licensing anything. Just getting them to agree that a simple (to be published) tool should have an open source license was difficult. (And took many meetings) Fast forward to two different Bay area universities and it was a completely different experience. Open source lic…
I had a fun time with the library copyright office. 6 months before my thesis defense I emailed them with "hi what's policy and procedure for creative commons licenses on theses". Nobody had ever asked before... edit: my thesis is cc-by licensed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of my least favorite experiences in grad school was dealing with our school's tech transfer office. They fought hard to avoid using the GPL for licensing anything. Just getting them to agree that a simple (to be published) tool should have an open source license was difficult. (And took many meetings) Fast forward to two different Bay area universities and it was a completely different experience. Open source lic…
I had a fun time with the library copyright office. 6 months before my thesis defense I emailed them with "hi what's policy and procedure for creative commons licenses on theses". Nobody had ever asked before... edit: my thesis is cc-by licensed.
However, while I have used MIT/BSD-style licenses in the past, I can no longer recommend them, as they potentially open up software users to malicious submarine patent attacks. That is, a contributor can intentionally contribute code that (purports to) read on a (not-even-issued-yet) patent, and then later threaten to sue users of the software.
That's why I instead recommend Apache-2.0. My arguments are more fully described here: https://www.cncf.io/blog/2017/02/01/cncf-recommends-aslv2/
I'd like to commend the author for realizing that a commercial license was not achieving the goals he had for his software and being willing to own up publicly about why and how he changed directions. However, while I have used MIT/BSD-style licenses in the past, I can no longer recommend them, as they potentially open up software users to malicious submarine patent attacks. That is, a contributor can intentionally c…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had a fun time with the library copyright office. 6 months before my thesis defense I emailed them with "hi what's policy and procedure for creative commons licenses on theses". Nobody had ever asked before... edit: my thesis is cc-by licensed.
Is it traditional for students to sign away copyright to their thesis to the University? That seems outrageous to me, but perhaps I am missing something?
some students may choose to request an embargo on their thesis, in those cases where their thesis work will be published elsewhere (in a peer reviewed journal, usually), or if their thesis would constitute disclosure of something for which a patent application is underway.
my thesis was boring enough to avoid those cases.