[License-discuss] <some FLOSS license> + commercial: Your thoughts?

[Cinly Ooi]

Dear Alec

Any license has to satisfy two persons' need, your client and you.

Presuming you are still building and you are able to isolate the custom
stuff, say into aplugin, the strongest protection for Open Source in this
scenario will be GPL with exceptions made for the plugins that merely
communicate with the framework. This way, your client can keep their custom
stuff non-open source, but if they modify the framework, they have to
contribute back the changes to the framework. Note that even if they modify
the framework, as long as  they do not distribute it, they need not  give
anyone their modification. If they distribute it, then their obligations to
provide source code is only to the people they distribute to. However, the
recipient can choose to share the framework code with anyone.

As for GPL, BSD or MIT, besides your client, another consideration is what
you want  from the license. Are you OK with someone taking your code
private? Please do consider the long term as well as the short term.

HTH


Best Regards,
Cinly

*****
Don't bother with footer please. I don't read them and will not be bounded
by them.
It cannot be enforced legally anyway. If it can, then remember this: This
footer always triumph yours.


On 24 September 2013 07:12, Alec Taylor <alec.taylor6 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I am building a set of generalised libraries and frameworks.
>
> Would like to open-source it all; however in the cases where a client
> wants their custom stuff under a non open-source license; I should have
> provisions for such a case.
>
> So what are my best options? - Currently looking at BSD/MIT and Apache;
> though have seen LGPL+commercial in many places…
>
> Thanks for all suggestions,
>
> Alec Taylor
>
> _______________________________________________
> License-discuss mailing list
> License-discuss at opensource.org
> http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20130924/3b85ee2d/attachment.html>