[Nodedb-interop] Fwd: Fwd: Re: Licenses

[Mitar]

Hi!

I am forwarding.


Mitar

-------- Original Message --------
From: Ramon Roca <(spam-protected)>
Subject: Fwd: Re: [Nodedb-interop] Licenses
To: Mitar <(spam-protected)>

  Mitar,
I've been trying to send this mail to the list, but for some reason it
gets rejected.

Cheers from Argentina!

BTW, I've been talking with people of many communities here. Some of
them know about you in slovenia...
I tryied to encourage them about the interop project, I think they
became very excited on this, they also find that a very good initiative
for all of us.



-------- Missatge original --------
Assumpte: 	Re: [Nodedb-interop] Licenses
Data: 	Sun, 05 Sep 2010 16:37:03 +0200
De: 	Ramon Roca <(spam-protected)>
A: 	(spam-protected)



Wait, important! Comuns XOLN is a global agreement, not a network specific.

Comuns XOLN is certainly an evolution of the PPA and wiereless commons,
with the strict aim of developing the original idea/meaning, *NOT*
another, and certainly is much more detailed because of the need to
address situations we faced and that were too much ambiguous with the
previous agreements, but still with the aim for being a GLOBAL license
and solve GLOBAL situations for a network available to ALL PUBLIC, it is
*NOT* to become a "network specific". Any network worldwide might face
same situations in the future.

i.e., PPA is good in terms of conceptualizing the idea, but doesn't says
anything or is too much generic about things which can become very
important, like not charging any fee because of traffic interchange or
how you finance the cost of interconnecting, co-ownership of
infrastructures,  being granted on access to public domains for being
open and therefore block for reverting to private... and many others.
Anyone will face same situations if hopefully your network grows and
diversifies the network topology, technologies implemented, and type of
users involved.

If you wish, the only "territory specific issue" is about the "default"
jurisdisction, that is, in the very unlikely case that a dispute goes to
court. That is a also a default clause which is common in international
agreements to avoid multiple interpretations. As an example, we already
deployed networks in Africa, but we might don't like to have to go into
court in those countries for a license dispute... Anyway is just a
"default" jurisdiction, if the parts agree, they can change the
jurisdiction to any other. So still global.

Take a look to other licenses like GPL3,having also large texts for a
matter with is much less complex than building interoperable networks...

In short, PPA is just a conceptual summary, but not effective as an
agreement while interacting with several agents like public
administrations or private corporations or for-profit organitzations,
the lack of certain detail creates room for uncomfortable
interpretations which are not particular for us, are for all.

Comuns XOLN is a global license, not network specific.

Al 05/09/10 13:56, En/na Mitar ha escrit:
>  I have some feeling that Pico Peering and Wireless Commons are somehow
>  initial ideas where guifi.net's XOLN is a product of using them for some
>  time. Like you make initial proposal and after experience you change it
>  to cover real needs and problems but in this process it becomes more and
>  more specific to your network. Now it would be useful to make one step
>  back again and make it general so that multiple networks can use it, but
>  all knowledge which has accumulated in the license would be used in there.