CAMBRIDGE, England — Open SystemC, the initiative launched by Synopsys Inc. and CoWare Inc. to standardize a C++ class library for modeling intellectual-property cores, has run into some problems over the terms of its licensing agreement, industry sources said. But the questions do not appear to have caused a significant schism within the effort.
A primary source of the objections is core provider ARM Ltd., a member of the steering group overseeing the Open SystemC initiative. "There have been discussions that the agreement that originally went on the [Open SystemC] Web site didn't meet the objectives as we understood them," said Alistair Greenhill, EDA business manager at ARM (Cambridge, England).
But Greenhill went on to say he believed this was an "implementation issue" and would be sorted out. "We're still supportive and committed to SystemC," Greenhill said.
Kevin Kranen, director of strategic programs at Synopsys Inc. (Mountain View, Calif.), confirmed that Synopsys has been "working through a few iterations of the license agreement." The main concern, he said, are additional rights that need to be granted for those who wish to redistribute source code. "We've worked through it with a couple of companies, but we're still working on it for the masses," he said.
The SystemC Web site refers to two downloadable licenses, one a community license and the other a commercial license, which would allow redistribution. But as of Monday (Nov. 22), the site stated, "The commercial license is still under construction and will be available shortly. Please bear with us."
Kranen said that "hundreds" of community-source licenses have been granted via the Web site, but since ARM doesn't allow its engineers to engage in "click-through" licenses, a different arrangement is needed for that company. Greenhill confirmed that ARM has not made use of a downloadable license.
"We had an agreement in place from prior discussions with Synopsys," he said. "I have recently been sent by Synopsys a modified license which doesn't appear to have any of the onerous conditions in it — but I can't say it's been approved yet. It's still being checked by legal."
Too exclusive?
Greenhill said that among the problematic items were attempts to make the license exclusive, thereby preventing other C language design activity. "I think when the license was first put up [on the Internet] it was written with the end user in mind and hadn't taken into account what other EDA companies could sign up to," said Greenhill.
Pete Hardee, director of product marketing at CoWare, said he was aware of no license provision that would prevent other C language activity. If there were one, Hardee said, his own company would have been among those objecting.
Greenhill also said that the SystemC steering group has divided into a commercial committee, on which he is ARM's representative, and a technical committee.
— Additional reporting by Richard Goering
