Hi all, I am currently working on a program, which I soon want to release as Open Source. Well, I don''t think it''s completely open source, since I want to publish it under a license that supports the following: - Free use of the software for non-commercial use - Paid use of the software for commercial use In both cases the source code will be provided. Which license should I use to publish my program this way? Greetings, TjoekBezoer

You can take a look at various licenses at the OSI''s site.

Personally, I like the MIT license - short, simple and unrestrictive.

---
Just trying to be helpful.

Sebastian Beschke
Just some student from Germany
http://zqf.de/randomz/

For now, release it with a standard open-source license such as the GPL. Then, if anyone ever actually buys it, you can release it to them under a different license.

"Sneftel is correct, if rather vulgar." --Flarelocke

Oh, and moved to "business of game development", where the suits hang out.

"Sneftel is correct, if rather vulgar." --Flarelocke

@randomZ:
I visited that site before, but since there are so many licenses to choose from I can''t decide which one to pick. And reading them all took more time then asking people who might have experience with a license that meets my needs. I shall take a look at the license you mentioned though.

Doesn''t publishing the program under GPL, and changing it later give any trouble? I mean, with the GPL license it''s free-to-use for non-commercial as well as for commercial purposes. If someone uses it for commercial purposes, and I change the license after that, is this user then obliged to discontinue the usage of my program for that commercial purpose? Also, when I release the program under GPL, can I already ask money for the commercial version, or does this not combine with the GPL license.

Again, I am asking this here because it takes a person with experience in this field 2 minutes to answer, and it takes me 30 minutes to sort it out

@Sneftel:
I am sorry, I did look for a suitable board to post it in. Must have overlooked the proper one though

Greetings,

TjoekBezoer

The GPL is free to use for commercial purposes, but not free to modify for commercial purposes. Or did you not want to allow people to use the software as-is for commercial purposes either?

"Sneftel is correct, if rather vulgar." --Flarelocke

No, if you want to use the program for commercial purposes you have to pay for it.

After you have paid for it you can use and modify the program any way you want.

For non-commercial purposes the program can be used and changed for free.

Greetings,

TjoekBezoer

I asked around a little, and someone came up with the idea to write my own license. The person suggesting me this came with the following short license:

-----
You have permission to use the entirety or portions of this source code in any non-commercial project; however, you may not redistribute the source, modified source, or binary product of this code without explicit written consent of the author. For commercial use please contact the author.
-----

My question ow is, is it sensible to use your own license, and does the one states above sound like it''s any good? Or in other words, what am I missing?

Greetings,

TjoekBezoer

The GPL states that people using the software are explicitly granted the freedom to redistribute. Richard Stallman, founder of GNU believes that this is an essential right of software users. If you do not want to allow users to redistribute, do not use any of GNUs licenses - the GPL and LGPL are GNU licenses.

However, there are several open source licenses which do not require you to allow redistribution. Go to SourceForge and browse through the licenses. Youre almost certain to find one that fits your needs.


[edited by - psamty10 on April 8, 2004 2:08:19 PM]