Giacomo A. Catenazzi
cate at pixelized.ch
Wed Jul 16 07:43:10 UTC 2003
Ryo Chijiiwa wrote:
> I'm the author of a PHP-based webmail client called IlohaMail
> (http://ilohamail.org) currently released under the GPL, and am
> considering offering my software under a license that would maintain its
> free (as in speech) nature but not necessarily be free (as in beer) in
> certain circumstances.
> Basically, what I had in mind was:
> 1) Individuals, and non-profit/academic institutions are granted usage
> under GPL-like terms
> 2) For-profit organizations may re-distribute the software, however if
> they charge more than a reasonable "distribution" fee, they must pay
> royalties to the project.
free as in speech? Not only individual are free to speech. Why you discriminate
Surely not free (5: No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups)
> 3) For-profit organizations that deploy or distribute a modified version
> of the software must either:
> a) contribute changes back to the project
> b) pay a license fee
1. Mysql, the libraries of KDE have "similar" terms, but open source compatible:
GPL or if you pay you can have other licenses. As copyright holder you have
the complete freedom of your work (and ONLY on your work).
2. Not effective. profit organization A has the option: pay a license
or contribute. It chooses to send you a minimal patch (e.g. style),
thus now A is free to use you code and You will flooded by unimportant
I have questions:
If I contribute to your code [1) or 2)], then you share with me the gain
of selling licenses?
And if I made big modifications (with a lot of added value)?
So: don't use such license. Try to check the various licenses of
the QT and MYSQL (but warning, normal user patches should be considered GPL,
you cannot relicense or sell modified version, without consensus from author)
> The basic idea is to make the relationship between corporate users and
> open source developers more reciprocal, while maintaining the spirit of
> open source. If corporations receive software from open source
> developers that allow them to add value to their services, then they
> should reciprocate in some way.
> Some of the questions I have are:
> 1) Are there re-usable licenses like this out there?
> 2) Would this conflict with the Open Source Definition?
> 3) Where can I get help writing licenses?
> Ryo Chijiiwa
> license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
More information about the License-discuss