|Subject:||Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)|
|Date:||Wed, 3 Oct 2012 14:02:33 -0400|
On Oct 3, 2012 9:33 AM, "Patrick" <email@example.com> wrote:
> It's still in the planning stage but once complete, I do not want it to be sold but to be free as in beer forever. If I understand things correctly to be a FSF approved licence, the licence must allow for resale, I won't allow this. Parents of autistic kids are already under enormous stress and most won't end up knowing there was a free as in beer alternative. parisites will swoop in an screw over the parents by sellign them the software.
Since you are distributing the code yourself you can offer the binary and sources for free. If a competitor wants to sell your software it is *still* available from your own website.
You're trying to clamp down on competition and that can't be done with the gpl.
The nice thing is that any competitors will have to offer an enticing value-add to the product and make the source code for that available to others under the gpl. Or they have to work really hard and spend money on a sales team to convince parents to buy their version of your software (of course their version will be the same as your software, it would be too expensive to both enhance the product and also sell it).
There's no reason to be fearful of this.
> I also have a project for controlling scientific instrumentation and crunching data. It's a for profit venture.
> I need a revenue model. I could give it away and offer paid support or sell it and also provide paid support.
Right and the FSF has recommended that for decades because it's a good option and it does bring in some cash.
> I want permanent credit for my work with the scientific instrument control project. If someone else uses the code i want them to have to display to the user that I was the one who started the project at a specific font and for a specific time period. This way if other companies want to offer paid support, the end users will still know that I was the one that wrote it and i can provide better support for it. If RMS did something like this I think he would be much better off now.
> Is there any licences that could meet one or more of these objectives?
You will be credited for the software you create in the copyrights file or the license file or in every source code file. If you use the gpl then any changes someone makes have to be licensed under the gpl as well.
The only way to guarantee that your name will appear prominently in the user interface is to use a different license when dealing with businesses.
Most businesses will not like the idea of selling or modifying gpl software so they'll be open to paying for a different license to be used and in that contract you can include the clause that credit to you must be displayed in the user interface.
Hope that helps and makes you reconsider not choosing the gpl!
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|