Subject: Re: Free Software and the Fortune 250
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 16:23:25 -0400

Frank Hecker wrote:
> Also, if we're talking about code here which Karsten's company actually
> wrote then there's no reason why the customer couldn't do a specially
> negotiated license agreement if they really wanted to (and in fact
> Karsten mentions this as an option). However I agree that that should be
> a last resort, and that you should first just test the customer's
> willingness to accept the GPL.

Heh.  Better than that.

Present them with an alternative with per client licensing, charges
for upgrades, and a disclaimer that not all features that appear in
the regular version will appear in theirs until they pay hourly
development costs or a fee to be negotiated with the person who
submitted the patch.

When they object point out that for them to have their own licensed
version requires you to maintain a code fork.  Any features that you
get donated, cannot be added to their version without permission
from the copyright holder.  That means negotiating with the person
who created the patch, or paying you for a clean-room implementation.
So they can have their version under their license, but...

Perhaps then they will understand the point of the GPL?