All these licenses and business models

[David]

On Fri, 2002-01-18 at 13:43, Risto S Varanka wrote:

> > Hi,
> > Sorry for the email I am looking for some advice on licensing, I am not
> > looking for legal advice simply some helpfull tips that I will not hold
> > anyone to.
> > 
> > I have a company with a software product that runs on a linux distro
> > (based on an RPM distro). Thsi product is a small business server with
> > simple web admin and apps included (email , schedule, doc management,
> > crm etc.).
> 
> If you offer some parts as free software or freeware, you could
> consider the Linux distributions as a marketing/distribution
> channel for those parts. Think about millions of people getting
> your 'free demo' on a cdrom...
> 
This has some potential, the solution we have is a linux distro in
itself based on Mandrake / Redhat with some patches to suite our needs.
I have already agreed with Mandrake to share profits with them on this
projects in certain situations (at least try to pay for what they have
done in creatin ga distro).


> > My issues
> > 1: I do not want to be a services only company, in fact I want to sub
> > contract most services (maybe even zope type model).
> > 2: I do want to be able to sell the system for a profit.
> 
> Then you probably don't want to give out too much freely. One risk
> is that you could give a starting point to a vigorous open source
> project that would become your competitor. 
> 
That is the real problem for me.
> If you found some good customers, maybe you could get them order
> some customizations or new features from you. 
> 
Thsi is the case with the very limited systems we have sold and I like
this idea very much. I can see a mass distribution though having a
requirement for a lot of this and us having to employ partners or
similar to assist withthe work. Otherwise stay closed and sell very few
systems (we are not a sales company). 


> > 3: I do want to make source avaliable to let developers and interested
> > parties get involved in the system.
> 
> You could consider GPL licensing for some parts of the system,
> because then commercial competition can't take the code into their
> closed prodocts. (Unless they break the law, which might
> happen...) If you want others to develop and maintain some parts
> of the code, so you save a bit on development costs, give those
> parts out as open source. If you give out that code under LGPL, you
> can take all the modifications and patches you get from community,
> and build your proprietary components on top of the LGPLed parts.
> 
What do you think of GPL and having develoeprs sign an assignation of
copyright statement that would allow GPL releases and also proprietary
releases (similar to what SUN are trying with StarOffice).

> Think about building a vital open source platform.  If there is a
> robust, extensible framework available for free, people can use it
> for purposes of their own, things for which you wouldn't even
> expect anybody to pay you. Still, people would have an interest in
> improving the platform.
> 
We have something here, not vital framework but a cobalt qube / esoft
type product that we could use for this purpose (think distro plus
webmin type thing but perhaps simpler for end users).

> You have the challenging task of finding a balance there: handing
> out enough to make a viable open source project possible and
> arousing people's interest, while not giving away too much to
> avoid the risks. 
> 

You are 100% on the mark here.

> You could also give the code for free or for charge to other
> companies, under an NDA or a limited license. You could include a
> clause that allows the other party to treat the code under
> GPL/LGPL after a specified period, like 2 years or so. (Think of
> this as a kind of guarantee they get when they purchase your
> product.) If the license is permissive enough, other companies
> could use your product as part of theirs. 

I will look into the delayed public license again for this purpose. Does
anyone know where this is.

> 
> I think releasing old source code under an open source license is
> not the best idea, as old source is not that interesting, and
> there would be some duplication of work too...
> 

Again I agree but perhaps as a guarantee as above it would be a good
thing.

> > 5: I would like many to get the system free (education etc.)
> 
> You can always release parts of the application as freeware to a
> certain range of users. However, if you have many classes of
> users, several licensing models, and a number of individual
> contracts, the management overhead can get at you :o) 
> 

Developers and engineers with Management overhead is not a nice thing, I
shall try and avoid this.


Regards
David

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20020118/cfdefbef/attachment.sig>