OPENCORES.ORG

Any license that is somewhat vague limits the usability of a core.

[rih] Everybody has their own reasons, and nobody should judge another on
their motives. It all comes down to what you expect and desire.

Because i want that if a company uses something i wrote, that
they give also something back. Yes, GPL might be not the right
thing (not even for software). But in the current world, where
it isn't hip for companies to share what they did with open source
software/hardware with the rest of the world, i'd like to have
some kind of protection that i might get something back.
[rih] Personally I get angry when companies borrow code from open source
designs and then attack the same open source community they so conveniently
took the original sources from.

Yes and no. Yes, we are developing hardware, yes, it' costs a
lot more to produce and distribute it. But i definitly do not
like to be ripped of by a company if i wrote something non-trivial.
I don't care if they use it, but i care if they make money with it
and do not give anything back.
[rih] What do you mean by 'ripped off'? Do you want a share of the profit?
Then GPL is definitely not your thing. I (and many others) make money from
providing design services. Providing cores without restrictions offers a
stepping stone for companies to use them. I then make money on customer
specific modifications and additional support.
I don't see any other way to make a profit out of this.

Richard

> Any license that is somewhat vague limits the usability of a core.

ACK.

			Attila Kinali

-- 
Praised are the Fountains of Shelieth, the silver harp of the waters,
But blest in my name forever this stream that stanched my thirst!
                         -- Deed of Morred
_______________________________________________
http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores