Which DUAL Licence should I choose.

[David Woolley]

Thomas Schneider wrote:
> 
> what I really would like to do is:
> 
> a) OPEN the SOURCE (of PP, the Program Porting Machine) there on 

Open should not be in capitals, as you are using it in a generic sense, 
not the open source sense.

> www.kenai.com

I can't see anything in their terms of use that requires open source.
> 
> b) Permit usage for free for a LIMITED amount of SOURCE Code for
> 
>     * private usage by individual programmers
>     * DEMO-purposes (I call this a DEMO Licence)

Depending on how limited LIMITED is, and which country, it is just 
possible that this would be considered fair use and not require a licence.

> 
> d) Collect CONTRIBUTOR's (implementing other SOURCE and TARGET 
> Languages), helping in Documentation, etc.

You can try, but the terms you are proposing will put most potential 
contributors off.  Quite a few people will contribute small bug fixes 
regardless of licence, but people who contribute significant new 
material will normally require an open source licence.  If they consider 
the software important enough, they may also allow you the right to use 
their contributions in proprietary forks.

You will also need a contributors' licence.  For normal GPL cases, the 
GPL doubles as that, but I don't think you want to have to pay royalties 
to your contributors, so you need an asymmetric licence!

> 
> e) EARN Money. I spent all of my money and time for this project.

Money can be earned other than through royalties.

> 
> 1.) Is there any EXISTING licence type available fulfilling my need's ?

This is not the right forum for expertise on non-open source licences.

> 2.) *OR*:
> 
> May I simply write this down as a "ThSITC" Licence (in a plain Text 

You will need to write it in a legally valid form.  As the default is 
very limited permissions, you provide it in any reasonable form.  Making 
it difficult to access will just reduce the number of legitimate users.

> File)and PUBLISH the source of PP (and a couple of related products) 
> there on www.KENAI.com under a 'OTHER Licence' ???

I can't see anything in the terms of use for Kenai that would forbid 
this, but you really should consult them.


> 
> Whar do you think/say?
> 

-- 
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.