Subject: Re: Open Source, Redistributing, Pricing
From: Morbus Iff <morbus@disobey.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 14:00:58 -0400

First off, thanks to Dave and Michael for giving your thoughts.

 >I'm not sure what you're asking here.  Under any Free Software license,
 >you can charge whatever you want for copies of the program (but you may
 >have to provide source code with your binaries).  But anyone who has a
 >copy can give a copy to anyone else.  So, practically, you're limited to

Ok. So, I can say:

   - for personal use, free!
   - for business use, $xx.xx

But I *cannot* say:

   - if you're a business and plan on
     distributing it your customizations, $yy.yy

Because that would imply that I restricted distribution before, which is 
allowed under the AL. I guess, theoretically, I could say the above and let 
people's innocence about the license work for me - that smacks of evil 
though. [Assume for right now that we're still talking about ONLY the AL].

 >You could make your own channels, tho (I think...).  You could also
 >charge web sites to be listed, or to be automatically subscribed to.

I could make my own channels, yes. Charging websites to be listed wouldn't 
be viable - there are just other alternative lists that the website could 
jump onto. Charging monthly updates to the list would be viable, but 
probably won't be something I'll get into.

 >If Morbus owns the intellectual property in his computer program -- and if
 >he's the sole author, then he does -- he can do whatever he wants with it.
 >In particular, he can release it under the Artistic License *and* he can
 >release it under another license.  He can charge money, impose restrictions,
 >and do anything else he wants to do, in this second license.  It's his

Hmm. I'm the primary developer on the code, yes. But I have incorporated 
code from a number of other people, some contributed simply under the guise 
of "it's an open source program, and I can't figure out X". No one has 
contributed code simply by seeing the entry on SourceForge and sending me 
cold turkey. Would I be able to nip this possibility in the bud by getting 
in contact with the people who did contribute code and say "hey! that code 
you sent, can I own the IP on it?"...

I didn't know, however, that you could add a second license to software 
(or, I'm assuming, even more than two). How does that work? I stick the two 
licenses in there, and then choose which ever one is more advantageous at 
the time of any decision making process?

In essence, I could say:

   - source code available under artistic license.
   - compiled versions available under moneygrubbing license
     that restricts distribution depending on your coffers.

Is that right?

 >Larry Wall has released Perl under two licenses simultaneously.  The user

Oh pooh. Here's something I didn't think of. The compiled versions of the 
AmphetaDesk include a full copy of Perl, as well as various modules need to 
run Ampheta. Doesn't that pose a quandary? Wouldn't my compiled versions 
have be released under the AL, and the moneygrub license (since I'm 
technically redistributing a bastard Perl that can only be used by my 
program).


--
Morbus Iff ( .sig on other machine. )
http://www.disobey.com/ && http://www.gamegrene.com/
"where's there's a will, there's a morbus ready to collect!"