For Approval By: S-GPL

Bruce Perens bruce at perens.com
Thu May 28 18:31:50 UTC 2009


Hi,

I know you mean well, but there are some very significant logical 
problems with this. It's pretty far from ready to be taken as a serious 
submission.

For example, if an enterprise user who has contributed distributes their 
work under the Apache license to further users, which license applies to 
those users? It would, logically, be the Apache license, even if they 
were non-profits or had not contributed to the project.

So, it only takes one "enterprise" user who has contributed to your 
project to put it under Apache for everyone.

Also, see past discussion regarding why programmers should not create 
licenses without an attorney's assistance.

    Thanks

    Bruce

zhihang wang wrote:
> The licence I used for my project is as follower. I named it S-GPL.
>
>  License (S-GPL)
>
> This open source project is protected by the GPL license ONLY for the
> noprofit usage.
> For ENTERPRISE customers, you MUST follow the license (named
> Signatured-GPL)below:
> * 1. If your enterprise has contributed to the this open source project, you
> can use this software freely under the  Apache License.
> * 2. The contribution to this project now only include helping improve the
> source code of the project, such as algorithms, architecture and functions.
> Other contributions should be recognized by the project leader.
> * 3. The enterprise customer can also use this software for any purpose
> under the [Apache License  by obtaining a signatured license from the
> members of the this project.
>
>   




More information about the License-review mailing list