GNU GPL can't force payment?

[Tzeng, Nigel H.]

Well, for permissive licenses I lean toward suggesting ECL v2 since that specifically addresses the concerns of research institutions over vanilla Apache.

We’ve gotten things released using OSI approved licenses but I don’t recall discussions on the software lists here regarding research community only licensing.  Why would you feel that the Non-Commercial part wouldn’t pass muster?  At least after you’ve gotten traction with using OSI approved licenses in general.

Regards,

Nigel

On 12/15/10 10:31 AM, "Cinly Ooi" <cooi at theiet.org> wrote:

Dear Nigel,


Seems to me that advising using CC BY-NC-SA for ease of understanding and commonality is the best course even if it isn’t a “real” software license.  Whatever is chosen it still has to clear legal and usually the university office of tech transfer but it’s helpful to be able to make the case that license commonality is a desired outcome whatever gets chosen.


Licensing is a minefield. You have this lethal mix of Research Grant requirement, university licensing policy, researchers' interest, research ethics controls, legalese writing, data protection and privacy, and changing policies with time that is all but impossible to navigate.

Truth is, which ever standard license they choose, even with CC BY-NC-SA, they still will want to stamp a 'research community only' clause on it. That is what they are used to and it conveys what they intent to do.

Best Regards,
Cinly


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20101215/38df7ab6/attachment.html>