Re: [oc] Inquiry

[Rudolf Usselmann <rudi@asics.ws>]

On Mon, 2003-05-05 at 12:00, niclas wrote:
> > Anyway, my point is that getting cores for free is not the major
> > reason to use open-source IP.  Rather, an open-source core is superior
> > to a closed, encrypted core because you can "get under the hood" and
> > fix it if necessary.  Opencores would make a wonderful source for open
> > IP,  except that the licensing conditions are antithetical to using
> > the cores in a larger, proprietary project
> 
> This is a great assessment !!
> 
> That would perhaps trigger 3 options for OC licenses.
> 
> 1. GPL
> 2. BSD
> 3. Commercial
> 
> And one can combine. id Software (talk about far from OC), for instance,
> licenses the Quake and Quake II 3D gaming engine under both GPL as well as a
> commercial license, which doesn't have the GPL restrictions and allows for
> better support.

So they make the SAME code available under two different licenses ?
As a free version under GPL, and as a commercial version under a
Commercial license with support ?
Thats very interesting !  I didn't know you could do that. I thought
if you release something under GPL, it becomes covered under GPL.


> For Open Cores that has "primarily a single contributor", a GPL license for
> those who can abide and a bit of "bread on table" for business who are
> prepared to pay some money to get their hands on it, especially if it comes
> with source and support.
> 
> More tricky for community efforts (there is some going on in BT), such
> commercial revenue may be distributed to the people who will provide the
> support, or some other agreeable arrangements.
> 
> Niclas

Regards, 
rudi               
-------------------------------------------------------
www.asics.ws  -- Solutions for your ASIC/FPGA needs ---
---------------- FPGAs * Full Custom ICs * IP Cores ---
* * * FREE IP Cores  --> http://www.asics.ws/ <-- * * *



--
To unsubscribe from cores mailing list please visit http://www.opencores.org/mailinglists.shtml