http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/ImageJ-Plugins-shop-tp5018455p5018504.html
I was addressing the issue of the Authors wishes. If the Author has
author to re-use their work. That isn't true if the work has a license.
> 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>