Which License should I pick?

[Nick Moffitt]

begin  Scott Long  quotation:
> Well, the project hasn't gone public yet, which is why I'm asking these 
> licensing questions. I don't anticipate changes to the basic code base, 
> but I do expect that people may want to write various modules.

	What of bug fixes?

> I wouldn't necessarily be unhappy if those modules remained
> third-party (i.e., they don't become part of the project). Then, I
> could take care of the core code myself and let a packager put it
> all together into a bundle, right? How would the individual licenses
> of the third party modules affect me, if they happened to be
> packaged together with my code?

	If your contributors use a DFSG or OSD-compliant license, then
the effects ought to be nil.  Both the OSD and DFSG forbid licenses
that affect other applications in a distribution.  The GPL explicitly
disavows all power in the event of "mere aggregation" as opposed to
combination into a derived work.

	The exact boundary for this distinction is where a lot of
disagreements come from.  Does use of shared libraries or CORBA modules
constitute combination into a derived work?  Why is this different
from statically-linked object libraries?  This is the conundrum that
influenced the creation of the LGPL (Lesser GPL. Originally called the
Library GPL, but the name was changed when it was discovered that
people mistakenly thought that they weren't supposed to use the
regular GPL for libraries.)

	The best way to handle this for YOUR code is to explicitly
clarify the scope of the license terms you use.  Remember that a
license is nothing more than you saying "I'll let you do this, this,
and this with my work." It isn't some magical spell that you enchant
your program with.  

	So you could distribute your program to me and say "I permit
you to modify this in order to translate it to Esperanto" and then
turn to Rick Moen and say "I permit you to modify this into a
screenplay".  At that point, neither of us could produce an Esperanto
screenplay of your work without further permission.  

	So you could release your work under the GPL, and say "this
type of third-party module is considered mere aggregation by me, and
thus does not fall under the obligations of the main work's license"

	I hope that wasn't too long-winded.

-- 
"Forget the damned motor car and build cities for lovers and friends."
	-- Lewis Mumford

end
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3