Licensing a Grasshopper definition

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mateusz Zwierzycki on February 29, 2012 at 7:22pm

Well, since evolute tools patented some geometry (!) everything is possible :) 

http://designplaygrounds.com/deviants/patenting-geometry/

But seriously - is combining some not-self-scripted parts of code enough ? - just wondering...

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on March 1, 2012 at 12:16am

"But seriously - is combining some not-self-scripted parts of code enough ? - just wondering..."

Probably yes. When you write actual code* you are also combining functions other people wrote, there's no conceptual difference.

There's no mechanism in Grasshopper that allows you to protect, let alone license, gh/ghx files. It has been wished for Script components, Clusters and entire files before, and I suppose some kind of password protection will become available at some point in the future, but it's not very high on my list.

--

David Rutten

david@mcneel.com

Poprad, Slovakia

* Except if you directly talk to the hardware of course

Permalink Reply by Piotr on March 1, 2012 at 2:09am

...and let it stay this way as long as it is possible...

Permalink Reply by Hannes Löschke on March 1, 2012 at 4:13am

Well Evolute didn't really patent geometry. They patented the use of certain types of geometry for constructing actual buildings.

...which is just as bad but not the same.

I can't see the reason for protecting script components... with VisualsStudio Express available for free I really can't see the worth of the script component beyond a few lines of simple code. IntelliSense and the object browser make coding so much more convenient... and the compiled component can do it's own little licensing. (Then again, you aren't allowed to sell anything compiled with the Express versions)

The concept of licensing parts or the whole definition is not so far fetched. Right now there are commercial components out there. Why not use Grasshopper as a visual programming tool and the cluster or internal scripting components to create "components" of your own?

I'd vote for a commercial developer version of GH.

Seeing the comunity here, I seriously doubt that too many commercial components will remain without their free counterpart for too long, though. Especially for the ones that were created using GH components only.

Permalink Reply by djordje on March 1, 2012 at 5:52am

Thank you for all the replies.

Maybe I needed to be more precise.

I want to use my Grasshopper definition as a part of a Phd thesis. This is why I was wondering if I can protect it somehow, until my Phd thesis start.

Afterwards, I have no intentions on selling it, and it can be distributed and edited freely, without any restrictions.

Permalink Reply by Danny Boyes on March 1, 2012 at 6:02am

Are you planning on posting in the Public Domain?

Permalink Reply by djordje on March 1, 2012 at 6:17am

Yes, something like public property.

Permalink Reply by Danny Boyes on March 1, 2012 at 6:29am

I meant before your thesis

Permalink Reply by djordje on March 1, 2012 at 6:46am

I do not understand you Danny.

Posting my .gh file in public, before the Thesis starts?

No, I am not planning to do that, as it can be used(claimed) by someone else.

But after the thesis is completed, or after I at least verify the GH definition somehow, at the University, then yes definitely I will post it in public, and let it be used free of charge.

Permalink Reply by Danny Boyes on March 1, 2012 at 7:02am

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html

Permalink Reply by djordje on March 1, 2012 at 5:47pm

Oh you were talking of the GNU license, when you said "Public Domain"?

Yes, sure.

So the GNU license is the thing I am looking for Danny?