Request for Comments

kmself at kmself at
Sat Jan 20 23:32:59 UTC 2001

on Sat, Jan 20, 2001 at 01:07:31PM -0400, Henningsen (peter at wrote:
> I think I have found a cool way to make money with open source, but I don't
> expect to become rich with it. I'd be well pleased if it would generate a
> normal income. I think what is needed is not a new license, but a way to
> organize the use of dual license schemes. So this is somewhat off-topic for
> this list, and I apologize for that. However, if you are willing to take the
> time, I am very willing to listen to your inputs. This document is intended
> to promote a vibrant Linux Game Programming community, and it is a first
> draft that *will* be changed. (If this is too long, just read sections 2.1,
> 3.1 and 5., or even just the last two paragraphs, which refer to earlier
> discussions on this list.)
> Linux Game Programming (LGP) Compact
> (c) Peter Henningsen 2001 - You are free to write similar agreements for
> your own project, using the same language if desired.
> Preamble:

1.  I'm not sure this is appropriate for License-Discuss.  I'm not
    saying it isn't, but you're looking more at business model issues
    than licensing ones.  Your license doesn't appear broadly to be OSD
    conformant, though I'm not giving it a close read.  I'd suggest the
    FSB (Free Software Business) list as a better forum. for info.

2.  Make life easy on us.  Swimming through a sea of legalese is
    difficult.  Providing a synopsis of intent, prior to the body of the
    license, may help.  Else, you're risking MEGO.


Karsten M. Self <kmself at>
 What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?       There is no K5 cabal
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list