* links (17/09/24) (19/09/24)
** papers and people (19/09/24)
*** very helpful (19/09/24) (24/09/24)
    - a colection of all or richard stallmans paper's [https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fsfs/rms-essays.pdf] (first published in 2002, updated 2004)
    - a paper written by Nicolas Jullien (prof. at IMT) comparing and contrasting open vs proprietary software [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2559454_Open-Source_vs_Proprietary_Software]
    - the gnu manifesto [https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html] the start of the moddern free software movement, the first time the terms was 
      properly used
*** rather helpful (19/09/24)
    - lawrence lessig is a researcher of law and political acitavist who has been tied with open/free software 
      for a long time, he is the editor of the stallman papers [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Lessig]
    - larry wall, he is the designer of the perl language, and is pretty influental in the open soures space,
      he has done work with UC berkeley. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Wall]
*** of minor note (19/09/24)
    - edward snowden, leaked NSA documents, while not about the licneses very much about keeping things open and avalible,
      a paper writen on the effects of his actions can be seen here [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275019554_The_Consequences_of_Edward_Snowden_NSA_Related_Information_Disclosures]
** licenses (17/09/24) (19/09/24)
*** open (17/09/24) (19/09/24)
    - MIT [https://opensource.org/license/MIT]
    restriction free, or there abouts, it makes the developers non liable for any damaged caused because of the software
    - GPL V3 [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html]
    all about keeping the users freedom, by forcing software licensed with it to remain in an opensource form, meaning it cannot
    be relicensed
    - GPL V2 [https://opensource.org/license/gpl-2-0]
    much the same as the GPL V3 but it can have a few differences specifically towards internationalization
    DRM and patents.
    it is often seen as controversal however due to some of its changes a video of linus talking about it
    can be found here [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaKIZ7gJlRU]
    - LGPL V3 [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.en.html]
    the LGPL is like the name says it is a lesser version of the GPL, it can be relicensed under any license
    it can be used as a smaller part of nonfree software unlike the GPL
    can require nonfree software as a dependacy.
    - LGPL V2.1 [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.en.html]
    much the same as the V3 but without the changes to patents and other things like that
    for ideas on the 2.1 vs 3 its much the same as GPL V2 to V3
    - AGPL V3 [https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html]
    the AGPL provides much the same as the GPL however it has an added clause for servers/networked machines
    if a fork of an AGPL project pushes an update to its users, it must be made avalible in source form
    for both anyone. EXAMPLE, ive made a mesaging app under AGPL, another person forks it and adds 
    the ability to send images, they must make the code relvent to that open and avalible to avoid 
    my project becoming obsolete
    - BSD 3 clause [https://opensource.org/license/BSD-3-clause]
    - BSD 2 clause [https://opensource.org/license/bsd-2-clause]
    - BSD 4 clause [https://choosealicense.com/licenses/bsd-4-clause/]
*** propritery (17/09/24)
    - AFPL [https://web.mit.edu/ghostscript/www/Public.htm#fulltext]
    - CC by nc [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/]
    - traditional copyright [see your countrys laws for more]
    - MicroSoft software license [https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/microsoft-software-license-terms-e26eedad-97a2-5250-2670-aad156b654bd]
    - apple licenses [https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/]
    - google corporate license [https://cla.developers.google.com/about/google-corporate]
*** no license
    - some projects are under no license which is a similar effect to open source licences

** news storys and intresting events
   - an open letter to hobbyist [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists], this 
     letter from bill gates to open source software developers, complain in simple terms.
     the letter was mostly in reference to people pirating copys of basic
     it claims that no one has the time to develope software and distribute for free, and anyone 
     who isnt paying for their software is a theif. the reaction of this was software went to 
     a new licensing format (which we still use today) of pre paid licenses when the hardware 
     is brought. although never directly said, in the marketing for the apple 1, it was a key
     selling point, that its version of basic was free.