Hi Authors,
I gave changes to the FET software. I made a native version for Iran universities.
Now for commercial use, it should be registered with the Supreme Informatics Council of Iran.
Am I legally allowed to register it in my name? If yes, please send me a written consent.
Otherwise, send me your personal details and complete resume to register with your name.
Of course, software registration requires software documentation. Such as design charts, architecture, etc.
Thank you
alizadeh55@gmail.com
Maybe i misunderstood. So you used parts of FET? FET it licensed under AGPL. So even if you only use a few line of FET or the algorithm than you must publish your source under AGPL. So even if you took only a single line of the FET source and all other 2 millions line of code are done by you, you still need to publish it under AGPL. You are not allowed to publish a native FET version ("changes to FET version") with an other license.
Please give me a link to your modifications/program so i can check it.
Dear Volker,
Thank you for your description. I still do not understand the concept of open source. I should study more about it. This is because copyright laws are not respected in Iran.
In any case, my wishes are:
1- Allow me to present the program to the universities of Iran legally.
2. Allow me to make changes to the appearance of the program (not code)
3. Earn money from training and services (not software itself).
please guide me.
Quote from: hassanalizadeh on August 29, 2017, 10:33:05 PMI still do not understand the concept of open source.
I guess you mixed that, because there are so many different versions of open source licenses.
There are some open source licenses only opened their source for readable; they don't allow to modify the source. The idea is that those guy just give you a prove that there is no hidden backdoor in their software.
Some open source licenses allow you to to what ever you want with the source. Read, modify, ... Everything without a limit.
Some open source licenses allow you to modify, but if you modify you also need to publish your modifications under the same license. The idea of that open source license is that you get something for free only if you also give for free if you modify it. So that idea is to be fair to each other.
But there are also a lot of other differences between of open source licenses. All with different pro and cons.
Maybe start reading here, but there are many other good sites in the internet available that explain better.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_free_and_open-source_software_licenses
Maybe just select 2 different licenses and write for example "gpl vs mit" in google. You will find a lot of sites that will you explain the differences between those licenses.
I also recommend to to always read the licenses before using code/software.
(i will answer more in the next post)
Quote from: hassanalizadeh on August 29, 2017, 10:33:05 PMAllow me to present the program to the universities of Iran legally.
The AGPL doesn't disallow that.
But i don't know your local Iran laws. I know that some governments are very strict and disallow software. As far as i know the most strict government is North Korea.
But there are also several other governments limiting the use of software. Some governments disallow or limit the use of software with encryption. Some governments disallow using network sniffing tools. Some governments disallow software that tries to get passwords. Some disallow software that can be used for military use. ...
I never heard from a government that disallow an open source timetabling software. But you need to ask a local lawyer. i can't answer that question for Iran.
Quote from: hassanalizadeh on August 29, 2017, 10:33:05 PMAllow me to make changes to the appearance of the program (not code)
The AGPL allows you to modify the source, but you need to publish your modifications also under AGPL.
Quote from: hassanalizadeh on August 29, 2017, 10:33:05 PMEarn money from training and services (not software itself).
The AGPL doesn't disallow that. Many big software companies do it exactly that way. They use open source software like GPL, AGPL, MIT, BSD, ... and they earn money by offering services.
For example "Red Hat" or "openSUSE Project". So they write and use open source software. They publish open source software your free in the Internet, but they still can earn money with it.
For example by doing first level support, training, handbooks, ....
So there are several ways how to earn legally money by using AGPL software.
Dear Volker
Thank you for your detailed description.
First case: If I give the software to customers without any changes, there is no problem. Also, if I do this through a website in Persian, it also has no problem. is it right?
Second case: But if I change the code, I must first publish it under AGPL. Then I treat the first one.
In this case, will I be allowed to insert my name, Company name and Contact in the software?
Thanks,
Quote from: hassanalizadeh on August 30, 2017, 10:14:13 PM
First case: If I give the software to customers without any changes, there is no problem. Also, if I do this through a website in Persian, it also has no problem. is it right?
Correct
Quote from: hassanalizadeh on August 30, 2017, 10:14:13 PM
Second case: But if I change the code, I must first publish it under AGPL. Then I treat the first one.
In this case, will I be allowed to insert my name, Company name and Contact in the software?
Both (case 1 and case 2) must be always published under AGPL. I don't understand your "Then I treat the first one." part.
You must care about the AGPL. Please read it. I will quote a part of it.
You are not allowed to change it so that it will look like you are the original author. Of course you are allowed to add your name and company name. But you must write that you modified FET and that your work is based on Livius and my work. You are not allowed to remove our names.
Please read the whole AGPL. There are more parts you need to care about.
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html
Quote of a small part of the AGPL:
5. Conveying Modified Source Versions.
You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it, and giving a relevant date.
b) The work must carry prominent notices stating that it is released under this License and any conditions added under section 7. This requirement modifies the requirement in section 4 to "keep intact all notices".
c) You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy. This License will therefore apply, along with any applicable section 7 additional terms, to the whole of the work, and all its parts, regardless of how they are packaged. This License gives no permission to license the work in any other way, but it does not invalidate such permission if you have separately received it.
d) If the work has interactive user interfaces, each must display Appropriate Legal Notices; however, if the Program has interactive interfaces that do not display Appropriate Legal Notices, your work need not make them do so.
please give me a link to your modified source as soon as you think that you are ready for customers. i will check than if you cared about AGPL correct.
Dear Volker,
Yes of course. But I have not yet decided to publish it. I am marketing FET. I still have not enough confidence to have enough customer. I also need to investigate copyright issues and legal rules. I do not want to be involved in judicial problems.
Anyway, as soon as I'm ready, I'll send the modified code to you.
Thanks a lot.
Hi,
Please check your E-mail. Link was sent for you.
Thanks.
ok. i got it. i didn't read all yet. just a part.
there are at least 3 problems. i will read the rest of your modifications as soon as you fixed them.
1) in the resource file you added a link to an image. sadly it is an absolute path, not a relative one. so i can't compile your source.
so i can't check if the exe file that you want to publish is based on the source you sent.
D:/HassanAlizadeh/Work_Project/6000+ Icons Megapack/AllVistaIco/Folder/My Documents2.png
2) a customer/user of that source can't see that you modified it. it look like the modifications are done by Liviu or me. You must add notes that you modified the source, since Liviu and me are not responsible for your modifications.
3) you added several new icons. it look like Liviu and me are owner of that icons. but that is not true. i don't know who that icons painted. so you have permission to use that icons? please write a note who is the owner of that icons.
Hi,
1) In the Resource file I don't see such link : D:/HassanAlizadeh/Work_Project/6000+ Icons Megapack/AllVistaIco/Folder/My Documents2.png
2) Should the notes be added to all files?
it must be clear who is the holder of rights of that icons.
if you store different holders of right and/or different licenses in a single folder, than you need to mention each file seperatly of course.
it will be a bit easer if you seperate holders of right and/or different licenses in different folder, since you only need to write "All icons in folder X are ..."