Nobody would be claiming anything, they're just not bound to adhere to your gpl v3 license invention , if using Lars original sources.
....
/Bingo
Seems like I have to dot the i's and cross the t's in this matter.
As we all know, unfortunately Lars passed away before he could choose and specify any license for his project, and as I mentioned, he did not even reserve the copyright for his work. From a licensing and copyrights point of view, his work was in a sort of limbo until now.
For the record, at the end of September (around a month ago) I announced here in this thread that I was creating a repository on GitHub for Lars' project, that I was reserving the copyright over the files in the repository in Lars' name and that I was choosing the GPL V3 (GitHub asks you to choose a license for any repository created there). I asked for comments at the time.
Now you are objecting to that choice? A little bit late, isn't it?
You seem to not understand (or not want to understand) that an Open Source license is there to protect
YOUR freedom
as well as the freedom of every single EEVblog forum member. What would happen if somebody in this thread or elsewhere claimed the copyright over Lars' work for himself, and/or decided to change the license to a restrictive one, with royalties and fines?
So yes, it is very much a question of ethics, and I believe I made the ethically correct decisions to protect Lars' work, to respect his wishes, and to protect everyone's freedom to use his design and source code with the very few and very reasonable restrictions that are spelled out in the GPL V3, which you can read here:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.htmlI consider the GPLv3 very restrictive and demanding. Knowing nothing about what the original author intended, this is not the license I'd have chosen.
That's your personal opinion, and you are fully entitled to it, and of course you are free to choose whatever license you want for your own projects or not even specify any. That is, of course, if you have developed and published any projects at all.
Now let's be clear: there are literally millions of software projects licensed under the GPL V3, and in fact it is the 4th most popular software license worldwide (the older GPL V2 is the second most used).
A few examples:
1. The Arduino IDE, which Lars used, is licensed under the GPL.
2. The gcc toolchain, which is used by the Arduino IDE and hence which was used by Lars, is licensed under the GPL.
I must say I am rather shocked that some of you who have been following this project since the early days when Lars was still alive, have never bothered to check with him what license he was willing to apply to his design and code. Or even after he passed away, have never bothered to clarify this matter with his family and friends.
And now, one month after I asked for comments, you are objecting to the choice of the perfectly adequate GPL V3, which apparently you have not even bothered to read?