{ "id": 180026, "title": "Are there any licensing issues with using Torchvision or other common libraries?", "url": "/competitions/osic-pulmonary-fibrosis-progression/discussion/180026", "author_name": "", "post_date": "2020-09-03T15:58:44.973133900Z", "votes": 3, "comment_count": 2, "views": 0, "content": "

The recent Global Wheat Detection competition had some issues with licensing and one of the things we had to watch out for was the fact that we couldn't use Torchvision. I never really dug into the details of why but the linked post gives some hints.

\n

Just wondering if anyone has come across similar issues in this competition.

", "messages": [ { "id": "996879", "postDate": "09/03/2020 15:58:44", "content": "

The recent Global Wheat Detection competition had some issues with licensing and one of the things we had to watch out for was the fact that we couldn't use Torchvision. I never really dug into the details of why but the linked post gives some hints.

\n

Just wondering if anyone has come across similar issues in this competition.

", "rawMarkdown": "The recent Global Wheat Detection competition had some [issues with licensing](https://www.kaggle.com/c/global-wheat-detection/discussion/164845) and one of the things we had to watch out for was the fact that we couldn't use Torchvision. I never really dug into the details of why but the [linked post](https://www.kaggle.com/c/global-wheat-detection/discussion/164845) gives some hints.\n\nJust wondering if anyone has come across similar issues in this competition.", "votes": null }, { "id": "998145", "postDate": "09/04/2020 14:21:07", "content": "

No worries here. Most opensource licenced code can be used. I quote the \"rules\" section:

\n
WINNER LICENSE TYPE: Open Source CC BY 4.0\n\nDATA ACCESS AND USE: Open Source CC BY-SA 4.0 + Ethics Requirements (specified in Section 7.A.)\n\nEXTERNAL DATA: Publicly and freely available external data is permitted if it is available for use that includes research or academic purposes\n
\n

CC By-SA 4.0 is compatible with GPLv3, which itself is compatible with MIT, 2 and 3 clause BSD, etc.

\n

Please see the following links: Creative Commons GPLv3 Compatibility

\n

GPLv3 compatibility

", "rawMarkdown": "No worries here. Most opensource licenced code can be used. I quote the \"rules\" section:\n\n```\nWINNER LICENSE TYPE: Open Source CC BY 4.0\n\nDATA ACCESS AND USE: Open Source CC BY-SA 4.0 + Ethics Requirements (specified in Section 7.A.)\n\nEXTERNAL DATA: Publicly and freely available external data is permitted if it is available for use that includes research or academic purposes\n```\n\nCC By-SA 4.0 is compatible with GPLv3, which itself is compatible with MIT, 2 and 3 clause BSD, etc. \n\nPlease see the following links: [Creative Commons GPLv3 Compatibility](https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/compatible-licenses/)\n\n[GPLv3 compatibility](http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Compatible_licenses)", "votes": null }, { "id": "1030594", "postDate": "09/28/2020 18:52:09", "content": "

Thanks for this. I had a look at the first link and it says:

\n
\n

Note that compatibility with the GPLv3 is one-way only, which means you may license your contributions to adaptations of BY-SA 4.0 materials under GPLv3, but you may not license your contributions to adaptations of GPLv3 projects under BY-SA 4.0.

\n
\n

So I'm looking very specifically at \"but you may not license your contributions to adaptations of GPLv3 projects under BY-SA 4.0.\"

\n

What are your thoughts?

", "rawMarkdown": "Thanks for this. I had a look at the [first link](https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/compatible-licenses/) and it says:\n\n> Note that compatibility with the GPLv3 is one-way only, which means you may license your contributions to adaptations of BY-SA 4.0 materials under GPLv3, but you may not license your contributions to adaptations of GPLv3 projects under BY-SA 4.0.\n\nSo I'm looking very specifically at **\"but you may not license your contributions to adaptations of GPLv3 projects under BY-SA 4.0.\"**\n\nWhat are your thoughts?", "votes": null } ], "comments": [ { "id": 998145, "author_name": "stanleyjzheng", "author_url": "", "post_date": "09/04/2020 14:21:07", "content": "

No worries here. Most opensource licenced code can be used. I quote the \"rules\" section:

\n
WINNER LICENSE TYPE: Open Source CC BY 4.0\n\nDATA ACCESS AND USE: Open Source CC BY-SA 4.0 + Ethics Requirements (specified in Section 7.A.)\n\nEXTERNAL DATA: Publicly and freely available external data is permitted if it is available for use that includes research or academic purposes\n
\n

CC By-SA 4.0 is compatible with GPLv3, which itself is compatible with MIT, 2 and 3 clause BSD, etc.

\n

Please see the following links: Creative Commons GPLv3 Compatibility

\n

GPLv3 compatibility

", "votes": null, "replies": [ { "id": 1030594, "author_name": "alexandersoare", "author_url": "", "post_date": "09/28/2020 18:52:09", "content": "

Thanks for this. I had a look at the first link and it says:

\n
\n

Note that compatibility with the GPLv3 is one-way only, which means you may license your contributions to adaptations of BY-SA 4.0 materials under GPLv3, but you may not license your contributions to adaptations of GPLv3 projects under BY-SA 4.0.

\n
\n

So I'm looking very specifically at \"but you may not license your contributions to adaptations of GPLv3 projects under BY-SA 4.0.\"

\n

What are your thoughts?

", "votes": null, "replies": [] } ] } ], "raw_markdown_by_id": { "996879": "The recent Global Wheat Detection competition had some [issues with licensing](https://www.kaggle.com/c/global-wheat-detection/discussion/164845) and one of the things we had to watch out for was the fact that we couldn't use Torchvision. I never really dug into the details of why but the [linked post](https://www.kaggle.com/c/global-wheat-detection/discussion/164845) gives some hints.\n\nJust wondering if anyone has come across similar issues in this competition.", "998145": "No worries here. Most opensource licenced code can be used. I quote the \"rules\" section:\n\n```\nWINNER LICENSE TYPE: Open Source CC BY 4.0\n\nDATA ACCESS AND USE: Open Source CC BY-SA 4.0 + Ethics Requirements (specified in Section 7.A.)\n\nEXTERNAL DATA: Publicly and freely available external data is permitted if it is available for use that includes research or academic purposes\n```\n\nCC By-SA 4.0 is compatible with GPLv3, which itself is compatible with MIT, 2 and 3 clause BSD, etc. \n\nPlease see the following links: [Creative Commons GPLv3 Compatibility](https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/compatible-licenses/)\n\n[GPLv3 compatibility](http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Compatible_licenses)", "1030594": "Thanks for this. I had a look at the [first link](https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/compatible-licenses/) and it says:\n\n> Note that compatibility with the GPLv3 is one-way only, which means you may license your contributions to adaptations of BY-SA 4.0 materials under GPLv3, but you may not license your contributions to adaptations of GPLv3 projects under BY-SA 4.0.\n\nSo I'm looking very specifically at **\"but you may not license your contributions to adaptations of GPLv3 projects under BY-SA 4.0.\"**\n\nWhat are your thoughts?" }, "source": "meta" }