[jordigh]

Wait, I don't understand.

Are the non-free parts of SMC there because the university demands that they stay non-free or because you want them to? Does this particular grant involve any of the non-free code you've already written?

Also, the grant speaks about releasing software. Do they consider it a "release" if you only give web access to the frontend, but keep all of the backend private?

[williamstein]

1. There are no non-free parts of SageMathCloud (here it all is: https://github.com/sagemath/cloud). It used to all be closed source, since the University tech transfer office required it in order to work with me... but I've since open sourced everything as required by the grants.

2. Regarding your next question, "the grant" I linked to is actually a program solicitation. It's the instructions for people preparing grants for the program, and also the guidelines for other people reviewing these grant proposals. The thing that is actually legally binding on the university is what the actual grant itself says. In my case the grant said (basically) "We will release all code under the GPL." I didn't write that phrase -- some other co-PI on the grant did -- but it was still signed off on by my office of sponsored research.

[wickedlogic]

Sadly, the open sourcing of software does not address the patent aspect. It makes subversion easy... perhaps common place, but is probably not really enough.

[tankenmate]

Unless of course if you put in your grant application that the code will be licensed under GPLv3 or any other license that requires submittors to provide a license for patents.