[IPOL discuss] licensing question

[Nicolas Limare]

Hi Brad, thanks for your appreciation.

> I'm wondering if anyone can expand on why the group chose to allow
> commercial use of the software (depending on the license of course),
> but not the algorithm description document.

This was chosen when we started the project because there was a desire
to reserve the right for future expansions of IPOL, for example a
printed version based on the description of prominent algorithms. But
there may be some reasons to choose a better license, the project is
still at an early stage.

> From a legal perspective, is there an incompatibility here?

I don't think so. The source code (plus its documentation) and the
algorithm description are published together by IPOL, but they are two
independant intellectual works. Code and description have some
independant value and usefulness. That's why I think it is possible
and can make sense to use different licenses.

> What happens if I modify the code for commercial use and need to
> provide documentation? Is the answer simply to write your own
> algorithm description and provide proper citation?

Yes, that's my answer. Of course you may also contact the editors
and/or the authors to see if they agree to reuse the IPOL algorithm
description for your commercial product.

-- 
Nicolas LIMARE - CMLA - ENS Cachan    http://www.cmla.ens-cachan.fr/~limare/
IPOL - image processing on line                          http://www.ipol.im/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://tools.ipol.im/mailman/archive/discuss/attachments/20111110/2d5c1666/attachment.pgp>