Liberal Licenses - FAQ answers

 

What kind of material can I license with a Liberal License?

Any material which is protected by copyright laws. Some examples are pieces of software of any kind (including source codes, specifications, documentations and belonging data) design patterns, constructions (including construction plans, specifications and documentations), artistic or literary works and databases - and of course combinations thereof.

 

Can combined kinds of material be licensed as one material?

Yes. While most other public licenses are specialized on a specific sector (e.g. pure software licenses or licenses for artistic or literary works, but not suitable for technical materials) the Liberal Licenses unify the licensing in these sectors and facilitate the licensing of combined materials. Imagine a computer game which is a combination of software and artistic works; imagine an autonomous robot which is a combination of hardware and software; or imagine a complex website which is a combination of software and artistic or literary works.

 

Are Liberal Licenses "open source" software licenses?

Not as defined by the "Open Source Definition" of the Open Source Initiative, e.g. the Liberal Licenses restrict the distribution into countries which do not respect the fundamental freedoms and Liberal Licenses usually restrict the commercial use. Open source licenses allow e.g. the administration of an unfree country to profit from the licensed material. Open source licenses allow to use the licensed material against fundamental freedoms of people like human rights, even against the licensor and the licensees itself. Open source licenses allow that somebody else takes your work, adds e.g. minor features, and distributes it as his work and possibly makes with that work the profit that you cannot make anymore now.

Moreover, depending on which Liberal License has been choosen by the licensor the source code can be protected and not accessible. Open source licenses disallow to hide or protect the source code and obligate the licensor to provide it. Therefore, key technologies will rather be licensed under a closed source license than an open source license. Open source licenses are not really applicable for journalistic and artistic works, literature etc., because they would obligate to disclose and publish sources, original scripts, original photos, etc.

Liberal Licenses can do both at the same time: protect the intellectual property and make it available to the general public for its intended use.

 

Are Liberal Licenses "available source" software licenses?

Yes and no. It depends on the license choosen by the licensor.

Under the LIBERAL LICENSE for works with AVAILABLE SOURCES (LL-AS) the licensor provides the sources (e.g. source codes) and the licensee is allowed to use and make accessible all the available sources. The licensor should provide all sources, but there is no legal claim for it, so the licensor cannot be punished for choosing a more open license in favor of the licensee. But when the work is shared by the licensee, this licensee is obligated to share also all available sources.

Under the LIBERAL LICENSE for works with PROTECTED SOURCES (LL-PS) the licensor does not provide any sources and the licensee is not allowed to use or make accessible any sources. To protect the intellectual property, imagine key technologies, can be crucial for a licensor and his business. Nevertheless the licensor can make such a material available to the general public and possibly boost its distribution and popularity, thanks to this license.

 

Are Liberal Licenses "closed source" software licenses?

Yes and no. It depends on the license choosen by the licensor. See question 'Are Liberal Licenses "available source" software licenses?'

Beyond the availability of the source code, Liberal Licenses differ strongly from classical closed source licenses for proprietary software, because Liberal Licenses allow a free distribution, download, copy etc. of the software and a free noncommercial usage of the software and optionally a limited commercial usage of the software. They are much more liberal by giving so much more freedom to the general public. Furthermore, the Liberal Licenses for works with available sources prevent a vendor lock-in (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendor_lock-in).

 

Is a software under a Liberal License a "free software"?

Not as defined by the "The Free Software Definition" of the Free Software Foundation. Same answer as for the question 'Are Liberal Licenses "open source" software licenses?'.

 

Can everybody download, copy and share the licensed material?

Yes, but in case of a commercial purpose only if it is not distributed for a monetary compensation.

 

Can everybody use the licensed material for noncommercial purposes?

Yes. Use means intended use, e.g. in case of a computer program to execute that program.

 

Can the licensed material be used for commercial purposes?

Limited. This depends on the license parameters provided by the licensor. The Liberal Licenses introduce the concept of "upper limits for the commercial usage". The licensor provides the actual values for these upper limits, e.g. in case of a software the licensor could allow to use that software for a limited period, by a limited number of users, on a limited number of devices etc. If the licensor provides no values for these upper limits, then no commercial use is allowed under that license agreement.

See also question 'How can I provide "upper limits for the commercial usage"?'.

In case you wish to use the licensed material beyond these limits, you will have to get a separate license agreement from the licensor. The licensor may use any other license for that purpose or he may use a Liberal License as a template and simply adapt whatever is needed to fit it to your agreement (such as binding it to your legal entity) so that the herefrom resulting nonpublic (commercial) license agreement will be consistent with the public Liberal License.

 

How can I provide "upper limits for the commercial usage"?

The Liberal Licenses introduce the concept of "upper limits for the commercial usage". As the licensor, you provide the actual values for these upper limits. The values provided at the time the licensee agrees to the license agreement will become part of the license agreement. You can provide these values in any form, any format and on any medium, which is suitable under the laws which govern your case to make these values effectively a part of the license agreement.

It is strongly recommended to provide these values along with the licensed material at the same time, same place, same medium etc. You could simple create a pure text file for the upper limits for the commercial usage. Here is an example:

SAMPLE TEXT: upper limits for the commercial usage

UPPER LIMITS FOR THE COMMERCIAL USAGE ===================================== This file provides the actual values for the "Upper Limits for the Commercial Usage" of the "Licensed Material" by "You" as the "Licensee" as defined in the license: LIBERAL LICENSE for works with AVAILABLE SOURCES 1.0. The "Licensed Material" is: MY FOOBAR APP 1.0 The "Upper Limits for the Commercial Usage" are exceeded, if at least one of the following values is exceeded: The maximum number of "Your" users (human beings) using the "Licensed Material" simultaneously: 3. The maximum elapsed time since the first usage of the "Licensed Material" by "You": 30 days. The maximum number of "Your" devices running the "Licensed Material" simultaneously: 6. ============================================================== Provided by the licensor JOHN DOE, Palo Alto CA (USA) on DECEMBER 12 2012

 

 

 

Can the licensed material be used or included in larger works?

Yes, it can be used in larger works and even included or bundled with larger works, but for commercial purposes this is restricted by the "upper limits for the commercial usage", see question 'Can the licensed material be used for commercial purposes?'. Please note that neither the licensing of the licensed material nor the licensing of the other parts of that larger work will be changed, but you should take care not to pick a licensing for the entire work which is incompatible with the given licenses of its parts. Please read about the compatibility of Liberal Licenses.

 

Can I access the source code of a software under a Liberal License?

Yes and no. It depends on the license choosen by the licensor. See question 'Are Liberal Licenses "available source" software licenses?'

 

Is it allowed to circumvent or break protective measures?

Yes and no. It depends on the license choosen by the licensor. See question 'Are Liberal Licenses "available source" software licenses?'

In case of a Liberal License for works with available sources it should be obsolete. In case of a Liberal License for works with protected sources it is strictly not allowed.

 

Is it allowed to decompile, disassemble or reverse engineer?

Same answer as for question 'Is it allowed to circumvent or break protective measures?'.

 

Can I alter a licensed material for noncommercial purposes?

Yes and no.

Under a Liberal License for works with available sources you can alter the licensed material unrestricted if you do not share your changes. To share changes is limited to repairs. You are not allowed to share changes beyond repairs (improvements, new features).

Please note: If you share repairs, you have to inform the licensor about the changes. The licensor can then consider to merge your repair into his works.

Under a Liberal License for works with protected sources it is not allowed to alter the licensed material. In case of a software you cannot use the source code.

 

Can I alter a licensed material for commercial purposes?

Yes and no.

Under a Liberal License for works with available sources you can alter the licensed material, if you do not share your changes, but not beyond the "upper limits for the commercial usage". See question 'Can the licensed material be used for commercial purposes?'. To share changes is limited to repairs. You are not allowed to share changes beyond repairs (improvements, new features).

Please note: If you share repairs, you have to inform the licensor about the changes. Also if you alter the material beyond repairs for your own commercial use, you have to inform the licensor about the changes. The licensor can then consider to merge your changes into his works.

Under a Liberal License for works with protected sources it is not allowed to alter the licensed material. In case of a software you cannot use the source code.

 

Can I repair the licensed material or adapt it to my environment myself?

Under a Liberal License for works with available sources you can do exactly that. This helps to prevent a vendor lock-in (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendor_lock-in). A licensee shall not depend on the licensor and its abilities to fix defects, deliver adaptions etc. The licensor on the other hand is less likely under pressure to deliver specific changes, maintenance and services, depending on the case.

Please note: If you share repairs, you have to inform the licensor about the changes. The licensor can then consider to merge your changes into his works. Please read also about the compatibility of Liberal Licenses.

Under a Liberal License for works with protected sources it is not allowed to alter the licensed material. In case of a software you cannot use the source code.

 

Can I implement new features in the licensed material only for myself?

Same answer as for question 'Can I repair the licensed material or adapt it to my environment myself?'.

Be aware that you must not share new features or other changes beyond repairs.

Please note: If you alter the material beyond repairs for your own commercial use, you have to inform the licensor about the changes. The licensor can then consider to merge your changes into his works.

 

Can I implement new features in the licensed material and share them?

No, not under any Liberal License. The Liberal Licenses protect the rights of the licensor and help to keep control over his intellectual property, which means the licensor determines the future development and versions of his work and shall not be restricted when he wishes to commercialize his work. Without a realistic possibility to control the future development of a work and in particular to commercialize that work, a potential creator of a work might not be willing or even able to actually create that work. The possibility to implement new features in somebody elses work and share that improved version, as possible under open source and free software licenses, most likely destroys the return of investment for the original creator. A creator might therefore rather choose a closed source license than an open source license in order to prevent such an impact.

In case you wish to distribute any changes on somebody elses liberal licensed work beyond repairs of that work, e.g. an improved version or fork of that work, you will have to get a separate license agreement from the licensor. The licensor may use any other license for that purpose or he may use a Liberal License as a template and simply adapt whatever is needed to fit it to your agreement (such as binding it to your legal entity) so that the herefrom resulting nonpublic (commercial) license agreement will be consistent with the public Liberal License. For commercial distributions see also question 'Can the licensed material be used for commercial purposes?'.

 

Is it allowed to export licensed material to other countries?

You can export the licensed material for noncommercial purposes in all countries except blacklisted ones. The Liberal Licenses introduce a blacklist, which is a list of countries with a significant lack of realized fundamental freedoms like human rights, civil rights, political rights and democratization, beyond a certain extend. The respective licensed material shall not be used by countries which do not respect sufficiently the fundamental freedoms and the respective licensed material itself shall not be used against the fundamental freedoms of anybody.

You can export the licensed material for commercial purposes in all countries except blacklisted ones, as long as the "upper limits for the commercial usage" are not exceeded. See question 'Can the licensed material be used for commercial purposes?'.

 

Are Liberal Licenses compatible with other licenses?

Please read about the compatibility of Liberal Licenses.

 

Is it realistic to expect any positive effect on the world by the blacklist?

Well, does your work have any effect on the world? Sure!  

Let's assume you created a work that has a significant business value or strategic value for the business world or governments or it is just an important component of products with such a value. Let's say for instance it's a technology that you implemented in a software library. You decide to license that library just with the LL-PS-SB. Now, nobody can share your library with a blacklisted country or its institutions legally. Eventually, a software manufacturer (in a not blacklisted country) includes your library in one of their applications. The manufacturer must license the application with the LL-PS-SB as well (since LL-PS-SB is strictly reciprocal) and hence cannot share that application with a blacklisted country or its institutions legally. Even if your work is just altered or it is simply added to a bare collection it cannot be shared with a blacklisted country or its institutions legally.

Certainly, a license cannot prevent at all that somebody actually shares your work illegally with a blacklisted country or its institutions - and it cannot detect the violation for you and it cannot take actions - and finally you have to consider all those laws which govern your case. But all that applies to all regulations. Nevertheless it can enable you to sue a violator and hopefully that will do.

See also question 'How effective is a blacklist if its not strict?'.

 

How effective is a blacklist if it's not strict?

Only the LL-PS-SB has a strict blacklist. Other Liberal Licenses have the same blacklist, but they allow to share the licensed material with the world wide general public as an exception. This exception is necessary in many cases: for instance think of media, art works, literature or somebody wants to put a licensed photo on a private website. Of course, all material shared with the world wide general public is then also available to the blacklisted countries and their institutions. Nevertheless, no Liberal License allows to share the licensed material exclusively or directly with a blacklisted country or its institutions. Therefore, all Liberal Licenses hinder the blacklisted countries to take advantage of the licensed material.

See also question 'Is it realistic to expect any positive effect on the world by the blacklist?'.