ImageJ Plugins shop

[Herbie]

Thanks Brian,

for making your comment clearer to me.

Well I intentionally wrote "freeware" which doesn't exclude licenses.

Furthermore, my comment was more subtle in that I distinguish between
_use_ and _presentation_ of software.
Both can be handle differently in a license.

Finally, I wrote "presented on a _commercial_ site" which makes a big
difference and was a reply to the original poster who announced to
present existing ImageJ-related freeware on his evidently commercial site.

I think this discussion is valuable, also with respect to licenses!

Thanks

Herbie

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Am 11.04.17 um 12:40 schrieb Brian Northan:

> Hi Herbie
>
> A problem occurs however, if existing work of others, even if it is
>> freeware, is presented on a _commercial_ site without explicit permission
>> of the authors:
>> Authors must be free to decide on which sites their work is presented.
>
>
> I was addressing the issue of the Authors wishes.  If the Author has
> licensed their work, then the license determines how it can be re-used.
> Saying 'the authors must be free to decide on which sites their work is
> presented' may give people the impression they have to reach out to the
> author to re-use their work.  That isn't true if the work has a license.
>
> Brian
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 3:08 AM, Herbie <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Good day Brian,
>>
>> and thanks for contributing.
>>
>> "Herbie -  My understanding is that one should only use "licensed"
>> software for business.   If the Author has not licensed it, then it is
>> uncertain what their wishes are."
>>
>> Sorry but I can't make any connection to what I've written.
>>
>> "Much of the ImageJ core frame work is BSD, which means one can use it in
>> proprietary projects, without distributing the source."
>>
>> Just for the record, it should read ImageJ-2 core (BSD-2).
>> The ImageJ-1 core is in the public domain, i.e. without license, except at
>> least the FFT section (details: <http://imagej.net/Licensing>).
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Herbie
>>
>> :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
>> Am 11.04.17 um 11:45 schrieb Brian Northan:
>>
>> Hi Curtis
>>>
>>> Thanks for the mention.  For those who don't know me, I do freelance work,
>>> programming image processing plugins.  ImageJ is by far my preferred tool,
>>> though I still end up doing a lot of matlab.  A lot of the work I've been
>>> paid for has ended up being proprietary.  However I've taken several steps
>>> to try and contribute to the opensource community, like contributing to
>>> the
>>> imagej-ops and imagej-scripting projects, and answering listserv
>>> questions.
>>>
>>> In terms of building a business around ImageJ/Fiji, I would advise making
>>> connections with the community.  If you enjoy small projects and like
>>> coding yourself, you can find opportunities on the message group(s) and
>>> through word of mouth.
>>>
>>> If you want to start a larger multi-person company I think you could
>>> target
>>> people/institutions/companies who are currently paying large sums of money
>>> for commercial image processing software, and figure out if there is a way
>>> to get them to switch to open source, while earning money off of
>>> support/improvements/customization/etc.
>>>
>>> Herbie -  My understanding is that one should only use "licensed" software
>>> for business.   If the Author has not licensed it, then it is uncertain
>>> what their wishes are.
>>>
>>> Most open source software has a license, most licenses allow
>>> re-distribution of source, some licenses allow redistribution of compiled
>>> code without source.
>>>
>>> FIJI itself, and many of the FIJI plugins are GPL.  One can use them for
>>> business purposes, one can post FIJI and plugins on their own website (I
>>> believe), but they have to redistribute the source code, and also
>>> distribute the source code of any derivative work.
>>>
>>> Much of the ImageJ core frame work is BSD, which means one can use it in
>>> proprietary projects, without distributing the source.
>>>
>>> Brian
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Herbie <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear list,
>>>>
>>>> I very much should like to revive the discussion concerning the topic,
>>>> especially after Curtis' extensive comments that are as lucid as the
>>>> arguments of the initial poster.
>>>>
>>>> My impression is that many of the remaining contributions are more to the
>>>> point and I don't see any reason to urge for a "respectful tone" and if
>>>> so,
>>>> in a more specific way.
>>>>
>>>> My opinion is that everybody should be free to pursue a fair and legal
>>>> business model.
>>>>
>>>> A problem occurs however, if existing work of others, even if it is
>>>> freeware, is presented on a _commercial_ site without explicit permission
>>>> of the authors:
>>>> Authors must be free to decide on which sites their work is presented.
>>>>
>>>> I very much should like to see further comments.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Herbie
>>>>
>>>> :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
>>>> Am 10.04.17 um 19:30 schrieb Curtis Rueden:
>>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There are many different schools of thought on software development and
>>>>> deployment, even within open-source software. It is important to keep an
>>>>> open mind to other perspectives, and assume best intentions. So first
>>>>> and
>>>>> foremost, I implore everyone to maintain a respectful tone in ImageJ
>>>>> community discussions.
>>>>>
>>>>> === Reusable tools are something to strive for ===
>>>>>
>>>>> When we develop software tools for ourselves - these tools start out
>>>>>
>>>>>> in a form that is useable mostly by yourself. It is usually when we
>>>>>> are developing it for our friend/colleague that we care for
>>>>>> re-useability. But once we do develop for someone else -  the tool
>>>>>> quality improves, documentation gets added, the tool gets feature
>>>>>> updates and bug-fixes, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> This narrative certainly rings true in my experience. The fact of the
>>>>> matter is that developing a reusable tool of broad scope is
>>>>> substantially
>>>>> (sometimes vastly) more work than developing a one-off tool of limited
>>>>> scope. How to fund/accomplish that extra work is often a thorny
>>>>> problem. I
>>>>> applaud efforts to do so, because the alternative—a lack of reusable
>>>>> tools—is not a good situation.
>>>>>
>>>>> We want to build a web-based community of developers and users that
>>>>>
>>>>>> benefits from such exchanges.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> 100% agreed. That is why we have ImageJ update sites. It is a big reason
>>>>> for the existence of ImageJ2. It is why we have the ImageJ wiki (
>>>>> https://imagej.net/), and why I wrote the page https://imagej.net/
>>>>> Distribution.
>>>>>
>>>>> === ImageJ is permissively licensed ===
>>>>>
>>>>> We want to enable tools to be - discoverable, re-useable and supported
>>>>>
>>>>>> by the author, for a price. Existing media (methods section of a
>>>>>> paper, supplementary pages, and methods journals) are unsuitable for
>>>>>> this purpose.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> ImageJ is funded by taxpayer money, and permissively licensed (
>>>>> https://imagej.net/Licensing). It is available to the community for any
>>>>> and
>>>>> all purposes, including commercial ones. From a general,
>>>>> non-science-specific perspective, an "app store" for ImageJ extensions
>>>>> could be extremely convenient, and could expand the ImageJ community.
>>>>>
>>>>> === The problem with non-free extensions ===
>>>>>
>>>>> That said, ImageJ's primary use case is scientific image analysis, and
>>>>> it
>>>>> is vital that such analyses be 100% reproducible. Non-free extensions
>>>>> are
>>>>> a
>>>>> barrier to that reproducibility. For a detailed rationale, see
>>>>> http://imagej.net/Open_Source and http://imagej.net/Reproducibility.
>>>>>
>>>>> === Objections ===
>>>>>
>>>>> I have two primary objections to imagejplugins.com as presented:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) In practice, it would encourage non-free plugins intended for
>>>>> scientific
>>>>> analysis, resulting in less reproducible science in our community. Even
>>>>> with fully reproducible FOSS, science is still difficult to do well (
>>>>> http://imagej.github.io/presentations/2017-02-16-imagej2-neubias/#/18/2
>>>>> ).
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) One of the primary goals of ImageJ2 is to unify online resources. We
>>>>> still need to integrate several major resources onto the primary ImageJ
>>>>> site (https://imagej.net/), including the ImageJ user guide (
>>>>> https://imagej.net/docs/guide/), ImageJ 1.x plugin documentation (
>>>>> https://imagej.net/index.html), and ImageJDocu Wiki (
>>>>> http://imagejdocu.tudor.lu/). A new site imagejplugins.com would be a
>>>>> step
>>>>> backward from that. If you want to move forward with an "app store" for
>>>>> ImageJ extensions in this vein, I strongly encourage you to gather
>>>>> requirements publicly from the community, and work toward some kind of
>>>>> central community standard—i.e., something official, supported by the
>>>>> core
>>>>> tooling of ImageJ. Yes, it is more work, but it is better for the same
>>>>> reasons developing reusable plugins is better.
>>>>>
>>>>> I also have a third pragmatic objection: implementing the security
>>>>> elements
>>>>> necessary to support a payment infrastructure is a lot of effort. The
>>>>> core
>>>>> ImageJ or Fiji development teams have neither time nor energy to
>>>>> facilitate
>>>>> making it possible, for reasons stated above.
>>>>>
>>>>> === Ways to fund development of ImageJ extensions ===
>>>>>
>>>>> Circling back to the broader question: how do we fund development and
>>>>> maintenance of reusable ImageJ extensions? There are many possibilities,
>>>>> such as:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Consulting—pay for the development, not the code. Several commercial
>>>>> entities (companies, consultants, freelancers, etc.) make a living
>>>>> coding
>>>>> solutions for clients, including ImageJ extensions [1]. In the typical
>>>>> case, the client pays for consulting and/or code development services,
>>>>> and
>>>>> the results are then released as open source whenever possible. In my
>>>>> view,
>>>>> this is a nice crossroads of commercial and OSS development.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Public funds, such as scientific grants. This is how much of core
>>>>> ImageJ
>>>>> and many Fiji plugins are funded. See http://imagej.net/Funding. I
>>>>> think
>>>>> public agencies are (in general) becoming more aware that reusability,
>>>>> including continued maintenance, is a necessary piece of the puzzle.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) Training courses with registration fees.
>>>>>
>>>>> 4) Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/) and similar donation mechanisms.
>>>>>
>>>>> The main thing to keep in mind is: how to fund the effort, while keeping
>>>>> the science reproducible?
>>>>>
>>>>> In the vein of "pay for the development, not the code," one idea I have
>>>>> discussed with other developers is a web-based bounty system for issues.
>>>>> Users may pledge money towards issues (i.e. bugs and feature requests)
>>>>> they
>>>>> want to see solved. Developers may work on these issues. When work is
>>>>> complete, the users confirm that their requirements are met, and the
>>>>> payment happens. Of course, there are many nuances, edge cases and
>>>>> pitfalls
>>>>> which must be carefully considered for such a scheme to work in
>>>>> practice.
>>>>> But these are the sorts of places where there is room for ethical
>>>>> innovation that keeps the science open while creating new revenue
>>>>> streams.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Curtis
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] E.g.: True North Intelligent Algorithms (http://truenorth-ia.com/)
>>>>> and
>>>>> OptiNav (https://www.optinav.com/imagej-plugins).
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Curtis Rueden
>>>>> LOCI software architect - https://loci.wisc.edu/software
>>>>> ImageJ2 lead, Fiji maintainer - https://imagej.net/User:Rueden
>>>>> Did you know ImageJ has a forum? http://forum.imagej.net/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Thomas Boudier <
>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Pushkar,
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think there is a big misunderstanding on what you want to do. I f you
>>>>>> want to set up a repository of existing plugins, ok, why not, but what
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> ?.  There are aleady many official repositories for plugins, I do not
>>>>>> think
>>>>>> we need one more. And if you want to create a repository, please ask
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> plugins developers if they want their plugins to be hosted on your
>>>>>> repository.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want to have commercial activity with ImageJ/Fiji, there is
>>>>>> space
>>>>>> for this, and the best (and only ?) way to do is to set-up a company
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> provide programming service  to develop custom-made plugins to
>>>>>> third-parties.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the idea of a shop mixing free (and open-source) plugins with
>>>>>> paid
>>>>>> ones is not a good idea as it is not the ImageJ/Fiji philosophy, so
>>>>>> please
>>>>>> clarify your intentions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/04/2017 15:33, pushkarparanjpe wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you for pointing this out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andrei Stefan wrote
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First, I am a bit confused about who "we" is in Pushkar's emails.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Pushkar's web site the google maps location of the "business" is
>>>>>>>> located close to the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, in a
>>>>>>>> residential
>>>>>>>> area.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Currently, I am operating out of Liverpool, UK. I have updated the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> default
>>>>>>> map location of the website template just now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andrei Stefan wrote
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pushkar, even though your emails seem very well phrased (business
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> language)
>>>>>>>> in terms of your intentions with this ImageJ plugin "shop",
>>>>>>>> personally
>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>> am
>>>>>>>> not convinced that you shared the true story behind your intentions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would love to get on a call with you and talk about the motivations
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> starting this website. I am writing to you separately to share my
>>>>>>> mobile
>>>>>>> phone number.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>>>> Pushkar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> View this message in context: http://imagej.1557.x6.nabble.c
>>>>>>> om/ImageJ-Plugins-shop-tp5018455p5018485.html
>>>>>>> Sent from the ImageJ mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> ImageJ mailing list: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  /***************************************************************/
>>>>>>       Thomas Boudier, Associate Professor, UPMC,
>>>>>>       Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France.
>>>>>>       BioInformatics Institute (BII)/IPAL, Singapore.
>>>>>> /**************************************************************/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> ImageJ mailing list: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>> ImageJ mailing list: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> ImageJ mailing list: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> ImageJ mailing list: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> ImageJ mailing list: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html
>>
>
> --
> ImageJ mailing list: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html
>

--
ImageJ mailing list: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html