MakeHuman Mesh new license

[Manuel]

The problem about mesh license is simple.

1) The initial mesh (basemesh), as database of verts coordinates and
faces topology, is considered as *source code*
2) The characters done with MH are considered as modified basemesh, so
*modified code*
3) So, if the basemesh is released under GPL, all characters done with
MH must be GPL too.

Point (3) is a problem for all professional users that want use mh
characters in commerical appl. (in example, games)
and, obviously, don't want release a public version of their work.

Starting from Andreas suggestion, we have examinated this (thx to Stefano Fabri):

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en

tht's DFSG (debian free software guidelines) capable:

http://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#hea ... d0c479ab9c

so prob. next release will use this license.

ciao,

Manuel

[Eternl Knight]

Uh, Manuel - I'm not sure this is any different. The language is simpler, but it has the same restriction, primarily - that the altered work can only be distributed under the same license.

Share Alike. If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same, similar or a compatible license.

I read the above to basically meaning if I use the mesh in (say) a commercial game, re-texture the mesh, or even build a new morph to make a digital clone of my wife - I will need to distribute the transformed work under the same license. In other words, any game or image using the work must fall under the "Attribution-Share Alike" license. Not a good thing. I notice, for example, that you ask people if you can use their images

Attribution is a fine thing, I doubt ANYONE has issues with that, and moving away from licenses focused around executable source code is a good thing. What exactly are you trying to make the license do? Is it that you require attribution? Is it that you don't want anyone to extend the mesh (i.e. create new morphs) without adding them to the set everyone can use? If you're only after attribution, then the Creative Commons is a good place to start - but requiring that every derivative of the mesh become "mandatorily" open source as well has all the same problems as GPL.

I've been involved in licensing 3D artwork before in an "open source" manner. Anything I can do to help - just let me know.

--EK

[Manuel]

Uh, Manuel - I'm not sure this is any different. The language is simpler, but it has the same restriction, primarily - that the altered work can only be distributed under the same license.

Yes, you are right.
We must find a different solution...this license problem make me crazy, I hate bureaucracy...

[osky]

I think that we could release the mesh obj under the CC 3.0 Attribution license[1].
So we solve this issues and actually will be also accepted in debian as it is the current orientation of ftpmasters.


[1]http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
[2]http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=431794

[Munkles]

Are you over-complicating things? I think you might be.

I'm going by US law here, I think though that many international laws are similar:

HERE IS A FIRST OPTION: EXPLICIT APPROVAL

Holding the following true:
(1) Someone, by default, owns the copyright to the source code in question. Copyright ownership is automatically attributed at the time of creation, to the creator.

(2) The copyright owner (let's say John Smith) is the sole controller of the right to reproduce what is owned. All rights are granted -- or not -- by the guy who owns the copyright.

(3) If John Smith says it's okay to use his source code for for-profit purposes under circumstances a, b, and c, then it's okay to use the source code for for-profit purposes under circumstances a, b, and c. John Smith said so. He's the owner.

(4) Get John Smith to say it's okay.

Step (4). That's it.

HERE IS A SECOND OPTION: DECLARED PUBLIC DOMAIN
Another avenue is to make it public property. Our kind-of-spirit Mr. Smith can say, "I now release all copyright ownership. Period. This is now Public Domain material." Then nobody owns it (or to be more accurate, everybody owns it!) and everyone can use it, for whatever they want to, forever. A potential drawback is that this is a one-way street (unlike trademarks, which can lapse into public domain and then be made proprietary again). Once ownership is put in the public domain it stays there. But you'll never have to worry about any of this legal nonsense, because if someone disputes whether it's public domain? At worst, ownership reverts back to John Smith. Who can then waive every case of use, making said dispute meaningless.

It's public property. Anyone can use it.

Two options that could make this simple. I say, make it Public Domain and be done with this. It's a waste of time, when you should be coding MH so I can get my darn mesh with an articulated jaw that opens and closes

[osky]

I think that MakeHuman actually could be intersted in the attribution clause that the public domain doesn't give.
Probably when the program will be more diffused the public domain option could become a good alternative.

[Eternl Knight]

I think if attribution/credit is what Manuel (& company) are after - the Creative Commons license is what you are looking for. Thanks osky for mentioning it. I was waiting until Manuel (or similar authority) outlined exactly what they wanted the license to accomplish. It is quite possible that they are after something a little more complicated than that (I notice they are quite adverse to the idea of forks in another thread).

As I mentioned, I've been involved in this before and can lend assistance, but I'm not currently aware what is desired! No need to accept my assistance by any means, but I'm not one to throw out random ideas/solutions hoping they match an unknown problem

--EK

[Manuel]

HERE IS A FIRST OPTION: EXPLICIT APPROVAL

Holding the following true:
(1) Someone, by default, owns the copyright to the source code in question. Copyright ownership is automatically attributed at the time of creation, to the creator.

(2) The copyright owner (let's say John Smith) is the sole controller of the right to reproduce what is owned. All rights are granted -- or not -- by the guy who owns the copyright.

(3) If John Smith says it's okay to use his source code for for-profit purposes under circumstances a, b, and c, then it's okay to use the source code for for-profit purposes under circumstances a, b, and c. John Smith said so. He's the owner.

(4) Get John Smith to say it's okay.

Step (4). That's it.

Unfortunately it's not so simple.
In this case John Smith make a "custom" license:

"source code for for-profit purposes under circumstances a, b, and c"

But this license is OSS approved? No.
So ftpmaster can reject it. This is a problem.

Code: Select all

HERE IS A SECOND OPTION: DECLARED PUBLIC DOMAIN

Not possible. Artists that has worked (and are working) months (years?) on MHmesh, must have at least a "thanks to", ora a bit of advertising for the project...
Ok Oss, but without exaggerate...

[Eternl Knight]

Manuel,

So far you have only described an "attribution" requirements. That is, for the mesh & morphs, you only want/need the license to ensure that credit is given to the MakeHuman project. If that is the case - the Creative Commons Attribution license (here) is all that is required. Whenever used, credit for the mesh/morphs must be given. The work can be commercial, free, or otherwise without issue, but credit must be given in all cases. As this is a license allowed by Debian - this will satisfy your "ftpmasters" requirement as well.

If there are other requirements, you kind of need to let people know...

--EK

[Manuel]

Manuel,

So far you have only described an "attribution" requirements. That is, for the mesh & morphs, you only want/need the license to ensure that credit is given to the MakeHuman project. If that is the case - the Creative Commons Attribution license (here) is all that is required. Whenever used, credit for the mesh/morphs must be given. The work can be commercial, free, or otherwise without issue, but credit must be given in all cases. As this is a license allowed by Debian - this will satisfy your "ftpmasters" requirement as well.

If there are other requirements, you kind of need to let people know...

--EK

Yes..it's the same thing suggested by osky:

I think that we could release the mesh obj under the CC 3.0 Attribution license[1].
So we solve this issues and actually will be also accepted in debian as it is the current orientation of ftpmasters.


[1]http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
[2]http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=431794

even if not 100% OSS approved...actually it seem the best choice....