hdarken wrote:
I think it's under the "Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License" that is what i'm thinking Scratch is using.
Yep - the initial post of this topic confirms that.
Offline
Hi,
the current license for scratch source code says:
Copyright (c) 2009 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
All Rights Reserved.
Scratch was developed by Lifelong Kindergarten group at the MIT Media Lab. See
scratch.mit.edu.
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of
the Scratch source code and accompanying documentation (the "Software"), to us
e, copy, modify, merge, publish, or distribute the Software or software derived
from it ("Derivative Works") for non-commercial purposes, and to permit person
s to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditio
ns:
1. The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in
all copies of the Software and Derivative Works.
.....
my question is: does this mean that if I write a derivative work I have to assign copyright of THE NEW CODE I wrote myself to MIT in order to be compliant? My answer is "no, because I understand that clause 1 above only says to include the copyright notice as is, not that even what **I** write becomes Copyright MIT etc..." but I would like a confirmation.
THanks.
M. Fioretti
Offline
Hi, after spending some time learning the Scratch license issue on the website on related forums, this is an engineers interpretation:
1>I can Download/distribute Scratch Software and use it for any commercial purposes.
2>I cannot distribute modified scratch software for any commercial purposes.
Now here's my question If i were to conduct courses for students using a modified version of scratch and some hardware to go with it, I would charge fees for the training and hardware, and not for the software.
Does this satisfy the 'non-commercial' clause of the license?
Offline
adwaitsdeshpande wrote:
Now here's my question If i were to conduct courses for students using a modified version of scratch and some hardware to go with it, I would charge fees for the training and hardware, and not for the software.
Does this satisfy the 'non-commercial' clause of the license?
It seems to me and the folks that I've checked with that it does satisfy it. Good luck with your classes.
Offline
Okay, that is an unexpectedly pleasant news! So, for obvious reasons, i would like to recheck.
From many discussions, i had concluded that i cannot use modified scratch for ANY commercial purposes. Whether i am charging for it or not. You may ask, if you are not charging for it, how will it be commercial? Here's the situation, i have developed a robotics course which uses a modified scratch software to program the robot. The product is incomplete without the software. So the software is an integral part of the software, yet i am giving it free and charging for the robot and training instead.
Does that change your stand?
*fingers crossed*
Offline
adwaitsdeshpande wrote:
So the software is an integral part of the software,
"So the software is an integral part of the course"
Offline
adwaitsdeshpande wrote:
Okay, that is an unexpectedly pleasant news! So, for obvious reasons, i would like to recheck.
From many discussions, i had concluded that i cannot use modified scratch for ANY commercial purposes. Whether i am charging for it or not. You may ask, if you are not charging for it, how will it be commercial? Here's the situation, i have developed a robotics course which uses a modified scratch software to program the robot. The product is incomplete without the software. So the software is an integral part of the software, yet i am giving it free and charging for the robot and training instead.
Does that change your stand?
*fingers crossed*
No, the stand remains the same. That sounds like acceptable use of the product.
Offline
I know licenses are good, but just hearing the word makes my head hurt...
Offline