Draft 1 of the OpenDesk.com Public Source License

[Alex Nicolaou]

Bruce Perens wrote:

> Why not dual-license? GPL + anything else you please. That way, if people
> want to do GPL work, they accept your GPL license. Someone who wants to
> do commercial work accepts your APSL 1.1 clone.

This is equivalent to forking the project at the start, unless you add
an addendum to the GPL that stipulates that GPL contributors permit you
to take their changes and re-release them under the APSL clone. Of
course, then it's not GPL anymore.

It is for that reason that I have chosen to use only my SOS license and
not two licensing schemes. Besides, I have discovered that amongst my
users and potential contributors there exists a great apathy about what
license I use anyway! They're mainly anxious to look at and modify the
code.

alex