Subject: Re: Proprietary but flexible licenses.
From: "Karsten M. Self" <>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:58:20 -0700
Mon, 7 May 2001 13:58:20 -0700
on Mon, May 07, 2001 at 03:52:17PM -0400, (
> Hello, all. My name is Adam Theo and up until now I've been a lurker.
> But now have a question (sorry, don't know enough about the current
> threads to comment on them).
> My question involves software licenses, since I have recently developed
> a couple of programs and am looking to release them. I must say that
> while i respect and understand the concept of open source and free
> software, and prefer it in many circumstances (in the case of
> wannabe-standards and individuals who don't mind not having control over
> their works). For the programs I have made, I am looking for a license
> that recognizes the ownership and control of the developer (like
> traditional proprietary licenses), yet allows the end user and third
> party developers access to the source code for evaluation and
> development purposes. 
> I want to still allow the end user to look at the source code, and even
> build directly from it, so to know exactly what they are getting, that
> the code does not contain trapdoors, bugs or security holes, or sends
> personal information back to the developer. I also believe that third
> party developers should be able to build add-ons and patches (for
> feature !  enhancements or bug fixes) to this program, even releasing
> these add-ons under their own license and even being able to charge for
> them.
> So my question is simply, does anyone know of anything like this already
> out there? Wjat do you know about it? thank you.

Microsoft "Shared Source", aka "Source under glass", as Eric Raymond put

This is not free software, it's a proprietary strip-tease.  I'd
recommend you reconsider.

Karsten M. Self <>
 What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?       There is no K5 cabal

["application/pgp-signature" not shown]