[Labs-l] Questions regarding the Labs Terms of use

[Ryan Lane]

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Rainer Rillke <rainerrillke at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> > Yes, it clearly states that all software has to be under an Open
> > Source license. But I see no requirement that the software has to be
> > publicly released anywhere, although it would presumably be
> > permissible under the required Open Source license for anyone else
> > with access to it on Labs to publicly redistribute it.
>
> There is an important misconception: Never assume the author licensed
> their code implicitly because the Terms of Use required them to only use
> open Source software on Labs or because it's linked to a component
> requiring copyleft. Only the author is able to grant a license but if
> they refuse to for code one got into ones fingers or if they are
> obviously closed source software, the right course of action here would
> be to drop their software from Labs immediately.
>
>
This alone is actually an excellent reason to require that code be publicly
accessible, with a license associated before tools are allowed to be run.

This was a pretty major problem in toolserver. When the migration occurred
there were a number of tools that had no license and couldn't be moved
because of that.

I'd be in favor of pushing to make it a requirement for new tools.

- Ryan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/labs-l/attachments/20150313/2c34d785/attachment.html>