8
$\begingroup$

Can I develop BSD/MIT open-source library for Mathematica using free non-commercial version on Raspberry Pi?

To state it differently: does the non-commercial limitation of Mathematica on RPi limit the developed library from being released under BSD/MIT/etc.? Because this open-source product can then be used for commercial products on other platforms?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your question is not clear. The licensing of any Mathematica package you write is up to you, regardless of what platform you are developing it on. $\endgroup$ – Szabolcs Mar 26 '15 at 18:21
  • $\begingroup$ It looks like you answered my Q, just to clarify - does the non-commercial limitation of Mathematica on RPi limit the developed library from being released under BSD/MIT/etc.? Because this open-source product can then be used for commercial products on other platforms? $\endgroup$ – denfromufa Mar 26 '15 at 18:25
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I cannot answer this question. If you are worried, you can contact Wolfram Research. My personal interpretation (which might be wrong!) of that limitation is that one can't use the Raspberry Pi version for commercial purposes. If you are developing the package with the intention to sell it, that might not be allowed. If you are running someone else's open source package for commercial reasons on the free RPi version, that might not be allowed. If someone else uses your open source package for commercial purposes, that you developed on the RPi, that's not your problem any more. It's theirs. $\endgroup$ – Szabolcs Mar 26 '15 at 18:29
6
$\begingroup$

From Wolfram's Website

Permitted Uses and Installations

Subject to the terms of this Agreement and Your acceptance thereof, WRI grants You a non-exclusive license to use the Product solely for personal or educational purposes on a Model A or Model B Raspberry Pi computer.

If the purpose of your library is educational or personal, then you are abiding by the license (well, you also can't be using a version 2 RPi, A+ or B+ model, but I assume that would be overlooked).

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ So is your conclusion that it is not allowed to develop on RPi a BSD/MIT licensed library for general use? $\endgroup$ – denfromufa Mar 26 '15 at 19:17
  • $\begingroup$ @denfromufa for confirmation, I would seek advise from Wolfram directly, but I think it would be problematic. Note that the Wolfram software license mentions that code created in a CDF must be licensed under CC BY-SA, and I would assume that any packages would fall under the same restriction. $\endgroup$ – bobthechemist Mar 26 '15 at 21:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think that restriction refers solely to CDFs, not packages. It applies to all "FreeCDF" documents, as contrasted with "EnterpriseCDF", and it's not specific to the Raspberry Pi. I somehow strongly doubt that WRI would want to prevent people with an RPi from developing open source packages and freely distribute them ... $\endgroup$ – Szabolcs Mar 27 '15 at 1:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Szabolcs One point to note though is that technically Wolfram don't even want you using the standard home use license to develop commercial packages. (Direct quote from a WRI sales manager). So you need to be careful about making a distinction between Open Source licensing and Commercial use. i.e. if you open source something you should explicitly forbid commercial use if developed on a Pi or a Home Use license. bobthechemist WRI had MMA running on the Pi 2 at their last conference - only using a single core though so I would expect overlooking too and the license doc updated soon. $\endgroup$ – Gordon Coale Mar 27 '15 at 6:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @GordonCoale Prohibiting commercial use is pretty much against open source definition used by OSI (see opensource.org/osd-annotated). Thus, it's probably questionable to call the resulting license "open source." A different question altogether rises from from ecosystem issues that such licensing causes to end users which would need to either re-implement such packages to be able to use them commercially, or pay (all?) developers of a package a commercial license in order to use it. $\endgroup$ – kirma Mar 27 '15 at 11:06
5
$\begingroup$

From Wolfram:

According to Wolfram’s terms, any package that uses Wolfram Language via RPi can’t be used in any commercial application. The scenario you describe below is outside of those bounds.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.