Dual licensing

[nospam+pixelglow.com at pixelglow.com]

Dear All,

I'm seriously thinking of dual-licensing my software library macstl, in the
style of Qt, mySQL, Berkeley DB et. al. with a GPL and a commerical license I
have some questions though.

1. Doesn't the GPL prohibit un-GPL'ing the code? Or does dual licensing rely on
having files with identical content but different licenses?

2. I'm uncomfortable with making contributors assign copyright to me, just so I
can dual-license. Would it be sufficient to get them to send me a form email
stating that they agree their contribution will be dual-licensed?

3. Any GPL-compatible commercial license templates I can look at? Especially
those that are clear and short.

4. The GPL obviously doesn't prohibit commercial activity on top of the
software, since Red Hat et. al. use services as a commercial model. Is there
any OSI-certified license that would either encourage or compel commercial
activity to have to use a different, commercial license? E.g. I note that the
mySQL site phrases this as "quid pro quo" but not an enforceable requirement.

For example, the Affero GPL tries to close the hole where someone uses the
software to run a web service but then keeps the modifications private. But I
don't see that the Affero GPL has been OSI-certified.

Thanks for your answers. If you need to contact me off list, use glen dot low at
pixelglow dot com.

Cheers,
Glen Low, Pixelglow Software
www.pixelglow.com
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3