topic Re: Policy on modifying standard library objects in GDL

Policy on modifying standard library objects

SenecaDesignLLC — Mon, 26 Sep 2022 20:58:00 GMT

well I cant really ask for money for the cabinet as it is not my property. I could however send you a detailed step by step process to add the option yourself. Its really not to difficult, and it will give you some more indepth knowledge of gdl. maybe a small paypal donation? to compensate for my wifes anger ha ha? and i guess for the time to write up the how to? Hmm...

[Update by moderator: Since Archicad 23, library part licensing has been changed to :
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
https://Archicad-talk.Graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=47320&start=20#p315061]

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

SenecaDesignLLC — Wed, 27 Aug 2014 16:07:09 GMT

Per the license that is on all archicad objects i cannot even share this object with you for free. i asked some questions and will let you know if they will even let me share the how to with out it being free.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

SenecaDesignLLC — Wed, 27 Aug 2014 16:57:09 GMT

we will see what i hear back from the admin. then we can go from there.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Laszlo Nagy — Wed, 27 Aug 2014 18:53:58 GMT

Yes, I contacted GS and asked them about the exact policy.
Hope to hear back from them soon.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

rob2218 — Wed, 27 Aug 2014 19:24:31 GMT

I'm confused...what's the concern at hand?
we have a user who has the ability to modify an existing proprietary object. What he would be compensated for would be "his time and skills" to be able to put together a step-by-step tutorial on how to actually make a custom object from an existing AC object.....so I'm a bit confused as to what the issue (or non-issue) is here?

laszlonagy wrote:
Yes, I contacted GS and asked them about the exact policy.
Hope to hear back from them soon.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Laszlo Nagy — Wed, 27 Aug 2014 20:29:27 GMT

His plans are not only to create a tutorial on how to do this specific modification. That I think he is free to do at any time. Based on what he told me he has the plan to modify such objects and offer them to other people as well for a price or on some donation basis, which can be considered redistribution of the modified GDL object content.

I just don't know what this licence type allows (all GDL Objects in the deafult AC Library have this licence type I think):

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/

which says:

NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.

So I told James (SenecaDesignLLC) to wait for GS's response.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

vistasp — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 06:03:50 GMT

laszlonagy wrote:
Based on what he told me he has the plan to modify such objects and offer them to other people as well for a price or on some donation basis, which can be considered redistribution of the modified GDL object content.

Hmm... What about objects that are modified/fixed and then given back to the community on this forum, the depository or elsewhere? What's the protocol on that?

I wish this was the license instead:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Laszlo Nagy — Tue, 30 Sep 2014 00:15:49 GMT

OK, guys, so I asked Graphisoft and this is what I was told:

With this license type it is not allowed to modify any ArchiCAD GDL Object. It also means such modified objects cannot be redistributed or sold for commercial pruposes. This is actually something that is written also on the page of Creative Commons about license types:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/

There it says:

Attribution-NoDerivs
CC BY-ND

This license allows for redistribution, commercial and non-commercial, as long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit to you.

So any GDL Object coming from Graphisoft that has this license type (you can check the license type of any object by opening the object for editing, then check the License field in the Details page) cannot be modified.
It can be redistributed only unchanged and in whole.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Karl Ottenstein — Tue, 30 Sep 2014 00:32:26 GMT

I'm not sure that it says that a user cannot modify the object, Laszlo. See:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/

where it says you can not distribute modified material ... but does not say you cannot modify for your own use.

Thus, people can still provide instructions here about what lines of code to insert, as I read this... as long as the reader does the insertion/editing themselves and does not distribute the result.

The biggest problem that I see is when people who modify an object for themselves only, have every intention of honoring the license, but then send a PLA to a colleague... even in the same office. Since the PLA contains the modified object, the license is then violated.

The fact that a single firm cannot internally modify an object for their own internal use... whereas a single individual can do so ... seems too strict.

All seems very awkward.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Laszlo Nagy — Tue, 30 Sep 2014 00:50:35 GMT

OK, let me run another round with Graphisoft about this.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Laszlo Nagy — Mon, 20 Oct 2014 21:34:07 GMT

OK, guys, so let me return to this topic.
After more in-depth consultation with Graphisoft, here is what I was told:

The most important point:
A person or a firm is allowed to freely modify any GDL objects within the default ArchiCAD library for their own purposes and use.

The other important question:
This licence type doesn't allow commercial redistribution. This means that if a person modifies a default ArchiCAD library object he may not resell it. So one is not allowed to get financial gain by modifying a default ArchiCAD object. If one wants to sell it, they have to create their own objects.

I hope this clears up questions about this topic.

Edit on Oct 22, 2014:
Another question: This licence type doesn't allow any redistribution of modified content, whether commercially or free of charge.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Karl Ottenstein — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 17:26:14 GMT

Thanks, Laszlo. To clarify your clarification.... 🙂 What I said earlier then is allowed, right?

Karl wrote:
Thus, people can still provide instructions here about what lines of code to insert, as I read this... as long as the reader does the insertion/editing themselves and does not distribute the result.

So, we can tell other users how to modify an existing object as long as we do not post the modified object?

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Laszlo Nagy — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 17:29:26 GMT

Yes, correct.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Richard Morrison — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 17:46:45 GMT

Karl wrote:
So, we can tell other users how to modify an existing object as long as we do not post the modified object?

This seems an overly cautious interpretation of what Laszlo said. I read what he said as not allowing the redistribution for resale. (i.e. commercial gain) How would reposting a modified object for FREE violate the license terms? I don't think it would, at least as it has been presented here.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Karl Ottenstein — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 19:51:16 GMT

laszlonagy wrote:
The most important point:
A person or a firm is allowed to freely modify any GDL objects within the default ArchiCAD library for their own purposes and use.

I was focusing on the above statement, Richard ("own purposes and use"). So, maybe more is possible, but at least we can give the lines of code to modify an object which is mostly what has been done here over the years...

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Richard Morrison — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 20:17:10 GMT

Well, I should probably clarify my statement a bit. While I stand by my interpretation of what Laszlo said, I think the governing authority is going to be what is embedded in the object itself. Generally, these appear to have been set with the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs license, which allows free redistribution of objects, but NOT redistribution with any modifications. So, Karl, I think your approach is the preferred one.

Re: Base Cabinet objects with 'open backs'?

Laszlo Nagy — Wed, 22 Oct 2014 10:35:41 GMT

Yes, I think the better phrasing is that the licence does not allow redistribution of modified content, whether commercial or free of charge.
So content can be modified for one's own purposes, but not redistributed in any way under the current licence conditions.
So if someone modifies an object and puts it here or bimcomponents.com, that qualifies as redistribution of modified content.
If someone tells another person on ArchiCAD-Talk how to modify the object, then the other person modifies it, and does it for his own or his company's use, and does not redistribute it. So that is a good way of helping fellow ArchiCAD Users modify objects for their needs.

Re: Policy on modifying standard library objects

Anonymous — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 06:03:19 GMT

Hello,
i need to understand, if i want to make a new object, something complex like a window.
I don't want to overwrite the GS object so let's say i use save as and give it a new name. Doing so i can use some GS code parts (without the object won't even work).
The new object can be redistributed, and make profit from it?

Re: Policy on modifying standard library objects

Karl Ottenstein — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 02:02:30 GMT

Ilder wrote:
Hello,
i need to understand, if i want to make a new object, something complex like a window.
I don't want to overwrite the GS object so let's say i use save as and give it a new name. Doing so i can use some GS code parts (without the object won't even work).
The new object can be redistributed, and make profit from it?

If you mean you would use some GS macros, then if those macros are in the standard library and you do not re-distribute them and your object's code is 100% newly written by you, then yes, you can distribute/sell your object.

The problem is that the macros for windows/doors (for example) are not the same in all localized libraries. So, most likely, your object would only work for the localized library that you developed it for.

If you do not rely on other elements in the library and write an object 100% yourself, then nothing restricts your selling or distributing it.

Re: Policy on modifying standard library objects

Laszlo Nagy — Mon, 27 Oct 2014 18:03:47 GMT

Yes, Karl is correct.
But just to be safe I asked the guys at GS HQ about this last question specifically and I was told that this is indeed a permitted approach.
Also, this is a good and recommended way of using macro content already developed by Graphisoft (so one has to work less): script your own GDL object, but feel free to make calls from it to default GS macros (the code of called macros is not modified in any way). An object created in such a way may be distributed by its developer either free of charge or commercially (for a fee) since it contains no modified default ArchiCAD library content.
Developers are encouraged to use this approach so they can take advantage of available macro content.

One remark about Karl's post: my understanding now is that if you have not modified those macros then you can distribute them (since default AC library content may be distributed in unaltered form).