Licensing issues

Scott Cutler scott at scottcutler.net
Wed Sep 26 09:06:40 UTC 2012


A separate executable, interfaced only over the network, implies pretty 
wide separation in my opinion. Web browsers that connect to GPL web 
servers aren't obligated to be open.

The reason I'd want it anyway is the network transparency--once I 
thought about it some, I really like the idea of setting up 3-4 dongles 
in my attic with different antennas.   I have a server up there already, 
so I wouldn't need to run more wiring.

Look, as I said, I plan on open-sourcing this stuff anyway.  I just need 
to reserve the possibility of distributing a closed-source personal 
branch that's still compatible with rtlsdr, and to possibly have a 
temporary period with a more restrictive license, like MS-RSL.

I haven't decided yet, at any rate.  It may just remain a personal pet 
project if I don't have enough time to spend improving it first.

-Scott


On 9/26/2012 1:49 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Scott Cutler wrote:
>> The short answer here is that the legal stuff is *unbelievably boring* to
>> me in comparison to coding, so if I can write 10 hours of code to save 2
>> hours of bashing my head against license documents, I will.
>>
>> The rtl_tcp route sounds valid, and easy, and something I'd want anyway.
> The interface clearly goes against the spirit of the license though.
> You shouldn't want to use it, if that makes sense.
>
>
> //Peter
>





More information about the osmocom-sdr mailing list