Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[aprssig] APRS Open Spec

Ron McCoy rmccoylist at blueantservices.com
Sun Sep 28 15:12:15 UTC 2008


<sigh>

As I said, in part of my post that you elided, "I have no interest in 
stealing anyone's IP."

What is it about hams that makes it so hard to form cooperative groups? 
I don't think anything about my post was provocative. I went out of my 
way to praise the work that Bob and others have done here. Far more than 
I ever have. If my tone came across as something else, sorry to everyone 
who took it that way.

I guess I'll just retire to lurking again. <I just deleted some snarky 
comments I was writing about happiness with the state of APRS. It's 
exactly the type of comment that antagonizes people without moving the 
group forward>

I've been having a great time working on Arduino projects with a local 
group of people who love to invent, repurpose and extend technology.  My 
own perception--not trying to project it on anyone else or claim it is 
true for all--is that that time is past for ham radio.


Steve Dimse wrote:
> On Sep 28, 2008, at 8:43 AM, Ron McCoy wrote:
>
>   
>> Thanks, Steve.
>>
>> Can you tell me how this would be construed as commercial copying?
>>     
>
> It isn't and I didn't say it was. Editing and publishing a changed  
> document is what is not "non-commercial copying". Copy means copy, not  
> edit and disseminate.
>   
>> As far as I've seen, there is no longer an  APRS Working Group.
>>     
>
> The fact that a group is not active does not make the group's  
> intellectual property public domain. I resigned from the group prior  
> to it becoming inactive, so I make no claim to the spec. Bob has a  
> very definite stake in it though. If he gave permission for you to do  
> this, and no members of the APRS WG objected after being notified,  
> then I'd feel comfortable if I were the one publishing. Without Bob's  
> blessing, and the chance for any other members of the copyright  
> holding organization to object, I would never allow something like  
> this on a web site I was legally responsible for.
>   
>> Last, if, in fact, the spec is encumbered in a way that prevents open
>> comment and the ability for the community to work together to make  
>> it a
>> living, evolving spec, isn't that an outstanding reason to write an  
>> open
>> spec?
>>     
>
> No one said you cannot write your own spec. I simply said that the  
> current APRS Spec cannot be edited on a wiki without the copyright  
> holder's permission. If you don't like the way the latest Tom Clancy  
> novel ends, are you allowed to copy it, change the ending, and publish  
> it? Even if you just correct a misspelling, are you allowed to  
> republish it? Even for free? Of course not.
>   
>> A copyright applies to a specific work. An open spec could be written
>> from scratch that could be in the Creative Commons.
>>     
>
> That is NOT what was being proposed. The proposal was posting the  
> copyrighted spec on a wiki and editing it. That is a VERY different  
> thing from writing an open spec from scratch!
>
> I never said anything about writing your own spec. Personally, I'd  
> consider it a waste of time, because without Kenwood (controlled  
> through Bob) and other APRS software authors agreeing to accept and  
> implement any changes you make, it would not amount to much more than  
> mental masturbation, but have fun!
>
> Steve K4HG
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>   




More information about the aprssig mailing list