Which license to choose?

[David Shofi]

Kevin,

Consider the CPL or EPL.  It has an inheritance concept but allows 
commercial proprietary modules to be developed.

David
 



David Woolley <forums at david-woolley.me.uk> 
02/26/2010 02:46 AM

To
Kevin Hunter <hunteke at earlham.edu>
cc
License Discussion <license-discuss at opensource.org>
Subject
Re: Which license to choose?






Kevin Hunter wrote:
> At 11:59pm -0500 Thu, 25 Feb 2010, John Cowan wrote:
>> Kevin Hunter scripsit:
>>> For the code part, what Joe would eventually like is for users to be
>>> able to freely engage and modify his code, but he wants to ensure that
>>> they give back any updates, fixes, or enhancements they make. 
>> [ GPL does not require downstream licensees to pass changes back, only
>>   forward to users of the downstream code. ]
>>
>> [ GPL further only enforces this rule *if* code is distributed. No
>>   distribution, no code sharing necessary. ]
> 
> Noted about the distinction.  Thank you *very* much for clarifying my
> misunderstanding.  The point is that he wants to make his project as
> Free as possible, while not deterring commercial use.  Is the LGPL the

He doesn't want it as free as possible.  If he did, BSD would be the 
clear option.  He wants to put restrictions on what commercial 
organisations typical want to do, which is to keep the source and 
modifications to it secret.

> best course then?  As I understand his project, it's to be in parts,
> both a front-end for end-user use, and libraries for linking and
> development purposes.
> 
> Does the LGPL only apply to libraries, for instance?

No L now stands for "lesser".


> Fair enough; my assumption and projections of his code base may be
> incorrect, but the question is still out there: Is there a way to
> protect his name if someone else does something stupid with his project
> (and then advertises it)?

Live in an enlightened part of the world, like Europe, that respects 
"moral rights" in intellectual property?
> 

-- 
David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.



*************************************************

This email message may contain information that is confidential and/or 
privileged and is intended only for use of the individual or entity named 
above.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or 
the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, 
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy the 
original message.  Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20100226/a5b1fee5/attachment.html>