Which DUAL Licence should I choose.

[Russell McOrmond]

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Tzeng, Nigel H. <Nigel.Tzeng at jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> Is it really so hard for us to be mildly inclusive?  As I stated in my
> original post, once you step outside accepted Open Source dogma you're on
> your own...you two guys don't even want to point folks in the right
> direction.

  Those of us that have spent the time to think about and understand
the benefits of Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS) don't
consider this a matter of being "inclusive".  I would consider it bad
advise to have something where the source code is available for some
people to look at and use for some restricted purposes (Which is true
of most software, including Microsoft Windows, by the way), but that
doesn't offer any of the freedoms that make the free/libre market of
FLOSS work.   It only confuses an already complex relationship between
community, law and commerce to be unclear about what it is we are and
are not talking about.

  I would also consider it bad advise to suggest that the only way one
can make money from software is to restrict the freedoms of the users
of the software and/or charge monopoly rents (royalties).  Recognizing
this is an important step to understanding how FLOSS works and is
thriving.   Some suggest that restrictions on software freedom is
solely a matter of ethics, but there are many like myself that
consider it to be bad for business as well.

  It is unhelpful to call something where the source is available
(which is true for nearly all software) "open source" and that
software using licensing that adheres to the OSI principles as "Open
Source".   It only serves to confuse people who need help in
understanding these complexities, not a hindrance.

  I don't think it is a matter of "dogma" to suggest that a long
discussion of non-FLOSS licensing is off topic for a forum called
"License Discuss @ OpenSource.org".  I believe as a matter of being
polite to those who wish to be at least close to on topic for this
thread to no longer be copied to this list.  Those wishing to discuss
non-FLOSS licensing know the email addresses of the other
participants, and can do so in a Cc: list that doesn't copy this list.

-- 
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property
rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition!
http://creform.ca/petition/ict/

"The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
 manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or
 portable media player from my cold dead hands!"