A couple questions:
For those of us that do keep up (mostly): Source code is considered a
published work and can be copyrighted. Who owns the copyright on
CODEC2 Has Dave Whose-VK-call-escapes me patented any of the methods
within it (ideas can be patented)? If so, what license are they
released under? Same question, really, for the copyright.
Here is the source for Codec2, including the license and copyright information:
I am not a lawyer, just followed lots of open-source stuff for the past 25 years. My understanding is that, at least in the US, copyright is automatically assigned to the author unless they specifically re-assign it. In the context of open source, that means that one project might have many copyright holders. The initial author decides on a license for the project, and all future contributions comply with and accept that license as part of their contribution.
The copyright holder(s) have the right to change the license, or simultaneously release the project under a different license if they wish. Where this gets interesting is there are many copyright holders and not all agree to the license change/add. If that happens, either the code contributed by the person(s) who don't agree to the license change must be removed/replaced, or the license cannot change. Big projects often require copyright reassignment--often to a foundation or other governing body--as part of contributing to the project to avoid this complication.
Looking through the Codec2 repo, I do not see any specific copyright (re)assignment required anywhere. The project is released under the GNU LGPL v2.1.
If the copyright holders collectively decided to close-source the project in the future, the version up until that decision is made will always be available under the LGPL, so open source work could continue on a fork form that point.
All the same questions apply to the M17 protocol.
The spec is GPLv2 licensed. See:
Other M17 projects use different licenses like the TAPR OHL. All M17 project repos are here: . See the "LICENSE" file in each repo for the specifics.
For D-STAR, it looks like JARL owns the copyright on the protocol,
DVSI owns all the IP related to AMBE, and Icom owns the trademark on
"D-STAR". Trying to figure out the equivalents for M17 in case
someone asks me.
On selling to the majority of amateurs that don't keep up what is
the elevator pitch? DV exists and people are either using it or
shunning it. Without talking about intellectual property what is
the big deal about M17?
Excluding IP, which is a big deal IMO, there are a few things.
The folks shunning digi modes that I talk to personally are in 2 camps:
1. Analog FM is universal, cheap, and easy.
2. Digital is too fragmented so see #1.
3. Digital is too complicated.
M17's elevator pitch to these is that with things like Module17 or Mobilinkd, M17 can be added to any radio with the proper interface. This makes it the most universal digital mode.
To users of other digital modes, M17 offers voice *and* data (yeah, so can D-Star), not just silly pictures from an overpriced webcam mic accessory and GPS positioning. Isn't vendor locked (again, it can be added to anything with a proper data port). It supports hotspots and all the other features digital users are used to. As far as ease of use is concerned, which is the selling point for the worst of the current crop of digi modes, that's an implementation detail that's up to the team adding M17 to a given radio's firmware. I think it's very important to get this right.
73,
Ben - KU0HN
