Artistic License

[Dale]

I’ve found the definitive guide to the difference between Distribution and
License fees. It’s about GPL but I think the concept holds true for other
open source licenses like Artistic License as well

GNU GPL Distribution Fees and Their
Limitations<http://www.miller-attorney.com/articles/MillerGNUGPL.pdf>,
by Benjamin Miller .

which really verifies all suggestions posted in this thread and
especially David
Woolley’s one:

>>You would probably have to only make the file

>>downloadable after payment had been offered, otherwise it might be
confused with

>>a license fee.

Hats off to David!



So if you can sell open source software with a distribution fee
(downloadable after payment has been offered) what happens if the software
has a bug or fails to run in the user’s machine? Should you provide a
refund? Like a 30day money back guarantee?


On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Philippe Bradley <philbradley at gmail.com>wrote:

> On 5 May 2011 11:38, Dale <netxe456 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>"You would probably have to only make the file downloadable after
> payment
> >>> had been >>offered, otherwise it might be confused with a licence fee."
> > So if I set up a site and sell the package how can I be sure that I am
> only
> > charging for a Distribution fee? I see that the distinction is not that
> > clear
>
> I think so long as you're not restricting the rights of the recipient
> of the software after they've been provided it (or at least, making
> them pay to loosen restrictions on their various rights to deal with
> it), you're in the clear.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20110512/d70c609d/attachment.html>