[License-discuss] Does GeoGebra meet the Open Source Definition?

[Thorsten Glaser]

robert.pollak at posteo.net dixit:

>> the terms of the Creative Commons
>> Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license (version 3.0 or later)

The -NC- licence types of Creative Commons are nōn-free.
Anything under those licences is not OSD/OKD-conformant.

> The main question seems to be whether it would be feasible to remove and
> replace the noncommercially licensed files, and whether this would be so much

It may or may not be possible, but as currently distributed,
Geogebra is not Open Source.

Depending on how intermingled these files are, it would be
possible for someone to invest a substantial amount of time
to fork both old and new versions of Geogebra and bring them
together mixing the OSS parts of the new version with the
other files from the old version, and thus create a new OSS
fork of Geogebra, but that’d incite substantial maintenance
efforts.

> On the one hand it restricted the (mostly hobbyist) Debian contributors, on the

The noncommercial exclusion has been understood to also restrict
inclusion on a CD/DVD/etc. which is sold, which is a typical thing
for OSS projects to do, even if just to bring back in the cost,
but also for funding.

bye,
//mirabilos
-- 
I believe no one can invent an algorithm. One just happens to hit upon it
when God enlightens him. Or only God invents algorithms, we merely copy them.
If you don't believe in God, just consider God as Nature if you won't deny
existence.		-- Coywolf Qi Hunt