![]() |
|
|
|||||||
![]() |
VHDL - opencores.org - Question on project licensing? |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
I would like to contribute a multi-cycle (slow, but area-compact)
(Hehe, someone else already released a pipelined integer-divider, to the opencores.org repository. Gence I'm marketing my divider as 'compact'!) I am reading through the FAQ, and one part has me a bit confused... === The 'licensing' portion -- I understand that the 'GPL' license is fairly restrictive in that it forces derivative works to be distributed in documented *AND* modifiable form. My goal is to let *anyone* use my integer-divider as they see fit. If they want to use it in a closed commercial project, that's fine. It seems like a GPL-release cannot be used in a closed project, is that correct? So under which license should I release my divider? LGPL, BSD, etc.?!? .... Also, is Xilinx Webpack 5.1ISE the final version that will run under Win98se (no flames please)? The newer versions refuse to install. Pacbell User |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
"Pacbell User" <dont_reply@dont_reply.com> wrote in message news:<sSgXa.472$ >...
> I would like to contribute a multi-cycle (slow, but area-compact) > (Hehe, someone else already released a pipelined integer-divider, > to the opencores.org repository. Gence I'm marketing my divider as'compact'!) > I am reading through the FAQ, and one part has me a bit confused... could I have a sneak preview of your divider ? (I want violate the license, whatever you will choose later) and you are right about licensing (that is confusing) GPL is what people think 'free' but in some way its more restrictive than commercial licenses. antti Antti Lukats |
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
BSD licencense is popular, but the original had some problems see:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html So get a copy of the 'new' version or state it like suggested 'revised BSD license'. Martin -- -------------------------------------------------------- JOP - a Java Processor core for FPGAs now on Cyclone: http://www.jopdesign.com/cyclone/ "Pacbell User" <dont_reply@dont_reply.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:sSgXa.472$. .. > I would like to contribute a multi-cycle (slow, but area-compact) > (Hehe, someone else already released a pipelined integer-divider, > to the opencores.org repository. Gence I'm marketing my divider as > 'compact'!) > I am reading through the FAQ, and one part has me a bit confused... > > === > > The 'licensing' portion -- I understand that the 'GPL' license > is fairly restrictive in that it forces derivative works to be > distributed in documented *AND* modifiable form. > > My goal is to let *anyone* use my integer-divider as they see > fit. If they want to use it in a closed commercial project, that's > fine. It seems like a GPL-release cannot be used in a closed > project, is that correct? > > So under which license should I release my divider? LGPL, BSD, etc.?!? > > ... > > Also, is Xilinx Webpack 5.1ISE the final version that will run > under Win98se (no flames please)? The newer versions refuse to install. > > Martin Schoeberl |
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Martin,
Copyright? Copyleft? Hey, if I do an I-Q converter, can I use CopyOrthogonal? Rob (at 90 degrees to reality) Martin Schoeberl wrote: > > BSD licencense is popular, but the original had some problems see: > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html > So get a copy of the 'new' version or state it like suggested 'revised BSD > license'. > Martin > > -- > -------------------------------------------------------- > JOP - a Java Processor core for FPGAs now > on Cyclone: http://www.jopdesign.com/cyclone/ > > "Pacbell User" <dont_reply@dont_reply.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > news:sSgXa.472$. .. > > I would like to contribute a multi-cycle (slow, but area-compact) > > (Hehe, someone else already released a pipelined integer-divider, > > to the opencores.org repository. Gence I'm marketing my divider as > > 'compact'!) > > I am reading through the FAQ, and one part has me a bit confused... > > > > === > > > > The 'licensing' portion -- I understand that the 'GPL' license > > is fairly restrictive in that it forces derivative works to be > > distributed in documented *AND* modifiable form. > > > > My goal is to let *anyone* use my integer-divider as they see > > fit. If they want to use it in a closed commercial project, that's > > fine. It seems like a GPL-release cannot be used in a closed > > project, is that correct? > > > > So under which license should I release my divider? LGPL, BSD, etc.?!? > > > > ... > > > > Also, is Xilinx Webpack 5.1ISE the final version that will run > > under Win98se (no flames please)? The newer versions refuse to install. > > > > Rob Judd |
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Rob,
> Copyright? Copyleft? Hey, if I do an I-Q converter, can I use > CopyOrthogonal? I didn't invent these words and I find them also strange Martin > > Rob (at 90 degrees to reality) > > > Martin Schoeberl wrote: > > > > BSD licencense is popular, but the original had some problems see: > > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html > > So get a copy of the 'new' version or state it like suggested 'revised BSD > > license'. > > Martin > > > > -- > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > JOP - a Java Processor core for FPGAs now > > on Cyclone: http://www.jopdesign.com/cyclone/ > > > > "Pacbell User" <dont_reply@dont_reply.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > > news:sSgXa.472$. .. > > > I would like to contribute a multi-cycle (slow, but area-compact) > > > (Hehe, someone else already released a pipelined integer-divider, > > > to the opencores.org repository. Gence I'm marketing my divider as > > > 'compact'!) > > > I am reading through the FAQ, and one part has me a bit confused... > > > > > > === > > > > > > The 'licensing' portion -- I understand that the 'GPL' license > > > is fairly restrictive in that it forces derivative works to be > > > distributed in documented *AND* modifiable form. > > > > > > My goal is to let *anyone* use my integer-divider as they see > > > fit. If they want to use it in a closed commercial project, that's > > > fine. It seems like a GPL-release cannot be used in a closed > > > project, is that correct? > > > > > > So under which license should I release my divider? LGPL, BSD, etc.?!? > > > > > > ... > > > > > > Also, is Xilinx Webpack 5.1ISE the final version that will run > > > under Win98se (no flames please)? The newer versions refuse to install. > > > > > > Martin Schoeberl |
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
"Pacbell User" <dont_reply@dont_reply.com> wrote in message news:<sSgXa.472$ >...
> I would like to contribute a multi-cycle (slow, but area-compact) > (Hehe, someone else already released a pipelined integer-divider, > to the opencores.org repository. Gence I'm marketing my divider as > 'compact'!) > I am reading through the FAQ, and one part has me a bit confused... > > === > > The 'licensing' portion -- I understand that the 'GPL' license > is fairly restrictive in that it forces derivative works to be > distributed in documented *AND* modifiable form. > > My goal is to let *anyone* use my integer-divider as they see > fit. If they want to use it in a closed commercial project, that's > fine. It seems like a GPL-release cannot be used in a closed > project, is that correct? > > So under which license should I release my divider? LGPL, BSD, etc.?!? Look at some other IP cores (perhaps some of mine) at OpenCores. I faced the same problem that you are facing, I wanted to protect myself but not limit the usage of any of my IP cores. So I created my own "license". It's on top of each of my files ... Best Regards, rudi -------------------------------------------------------- www.asics.ws --- Solutions for your ASIC/FPGA needs --- ----------------- FPGAs * Full Custom ICs * IP Cores --- FREE IP Cores --> http://www.asics.ws/ <-- FREE IP Cores Rudolf Usselmann |
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Pacbell User wrote:
> The 'licensing' portion -- I understand that the 'GPL' license > is fairly restrictive in that it forces derivative works to be > distributed in documented *AND* modifiable form. LGPL will not really help you here and I am not really sure how you would apply it to a hardware design in any case. Can you LGPL license hardware designs and treat the situation is if you were linking against a library thus being ok with binary distribution? Does that really work? I personally prefer the GPL over most other licenses however in this case either having no license or a BSD style one will probably suffice. Jon. Jon Masters |
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Error: Physical sythesis tool PALAC is not supported by Formal Verification tool Conf | bbiandov | Software | 0 | 12-22-2008 05:25 AM |
| ASP.Net Project Structure Question | koraykazgan | Software | 0 | 08-10-2007 08:23 AM |
| StudentFilmmakers.com Hosts Second Annual PROJECT: FAIR Anti-Piracy PSA Contest and Online Showcase For VSDA | Walter Traprock | DVD Video | 2 | 02-06-2006 01:49 AM |
| Re: Good morning or good evening depending upon your location. I want to ask you the most important question of your life. Your joy or sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good | Filthy Mcnasty | DVD Video | 0 | 04-25-2005 04:29 AM |
| Windows Licensing question. | Gaz | A+ Certification | 3 | 10-07-2003 03:46 PM |