Open Source Licensing
Although the internet has been running for decades on (F)OSS, with Linux being the primary example, only recently robotics companies have started to embrace (F)OSS. The fast access to state-of-the-art algorithms and collaborative (hence cheaper) developments outweigh the common not-invented-here attitude. Making use of (F)OSS for commercial robotic systems requires proper assessment of the software licences, for which we have collected the best practices. A first yet quite complete overview on licensing issues can be found on dedicated websites [2-4].
Importantly, a common misunderstanding about the “business friendliness” of open-source software licenses must be corrected [1]. Although some licenses, such as (L)GPL live up to their difficult reputation that any new software also must be released as FOSS, this is not true for most licenses that are used for the recommended frameworks such as ROS. Most often, ROS packages are released under Apache 2.0, BSD, or MIT licenses 113] which allow use of the free open-source software inside closed commercial software products.
Recommendations
The recommended best practice before commencing agriculture robot product development is to conduct a thorough licensing trace to ensure that there are no hidden liabilities. Note that software packages without a license are more of a liability than those with a license, because the authors formally still have all the rights, even if they make their source code publicly available.