Open Source Software Licensing Patterns

Abstract

<p>This paper presents the results of the first field season carried out in the abandoned mud brick structures of the Bat Oasis in Oman. Drawing on planning, building analysis, excavation and ethnographic interviews, this project is exploring the recent and contemporary past of the mud brick village which was occupied up until the 1970s. The vast majority of the rural population of Oman lived in mud brick villages and the Bat Oasis provides an excellent opportunity to understand more about the ways in which vernacular architectureOver the last two decades there have been thousands of software releases with ever increasing complexity. One division between software types is whether it is proprietary type software, such as Windows and DB2, or Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS), such as Linux and MySQL. Both types have associated licenses that define the terms and conditions of use, reuse and adaptation. The FLOSS term is convenient shorthand to encapsulate the various flavours of open source. In previous work, we have identified a number of patterns that can be used in developing a license for proprietary software. Here we show licensing patterns for FLOSS, and will provide a set of patterns that can be added to the existing software licensing pattern language [1].</p><p> To be categorized as FLOSS, the software license must grant certain rights to the user. These rights range from the basic access to the software's source code to the rights to make copies and distribution of the program. There has been much debate in the FLOSS community as to the extent of the rights, duties and privileges that are required to fall within various categories of FLOSS. shaped social structures, and the reverse. Excavation and oral histories provide historical context for this understanding, and can also help inform heritage plans for the site.</p>