views:

228

answers:

6

Hi,

I would like to open source my complete application and I don't mind at all people using my code where-ever as long as they keep the copyright notice of the work. I also need food on the table, which license allows me to have some money if say a commercial site/company wants to use the code?

Does it really matter which license I choose? I can just have a "paypal donate" button and choose a liberal license?

any help.

+6  A: 

You could follow the MySQL model and dual license your code under the GPL and a commercial license. See here for their license terms

This way anyone who complies with the GPL license gets your code for free. Anyone with a commercial app that isn't GPL compliant has to pay you a fee for the use of your code.

Glen
That involves maintaining two copies of the code, one open source the other closed source, and working very hard to ensure your closed source version doesn't become surpassed once people start working on the open source version themselves.
scragar
@scragar, I don't think you need 2 copies. I think the legal setup MySQL have is that the default license is a commercial one and they provide an exception for FOSS projects. IANAL though, so could be wrong here.
Glen
You only need to do that if you accept updates from others, which you may or may not want to do.
anon
The mysql license model allows you to choose under which license you want to use the software. However, if you choose GPL you must adhere to GPL in derivative software. If you do not want to do that, you need to choose the commercial license and pay for it.
txwikinger
I understand the dual license model. But what I have hard time understanding say "jQuery" it's under MIT/GPL (last time i checked). Now I used jQuery in commercial sites as a consultant but I never thought my customer paid for it? I have never heard of anyone paying for jQuery.. This is where I am getting completely confused with the dual license model.
wailer
Both MIT and GPL have nothing to do with paying money. In fact, no open source license has.
The MIT license isn't a commercial one Antonio. So the choice is really between 2 open source licenses. It's up to the end user to decide which license to use. But either way they don't have to pay for jQuery.
Glen
Nokia do this as well with Qt - the code is identical - you can get away with only one version. The only difference is the license you release it under. People c choose the GPL version for free, or the commercial version and fork out some code.
Thomi
Thank you all for clarifying license issue. I got lot more new information then I actually hoped for also it clarified my confusion regarding licenses.
wailer
A: 

No liberal open source license can prevent commercial use of your product, without payment. If you really want payment, you should dual license your code, with a restrictive open source licence such as GPL and a commercial license that removes those restrictions on the payment of a fee.

anon
The GPL doesn't prevent commercial use, too. But this depends on the meaning of "commercial" and "use".
GPL ensures that the 4 freedoms as stated by the FSF can be enforced. There is nothing in the GPL that prevents commercial use or even sale of the software.
txwikinger
Unfortunately most businesses don't want their users to have all of those freedoms, and so cannot incorporate GPL code in their products.
Artelius
@txwikinger I didn't intend to suggest that it did. However, most commercial users find it inimicable and would prefer to use a different license, if one was available. Which is what I sugest the OP could charge for.
anon
+2  A: 

Glen is right: if you use GPL, a commercial company can use your code but they have to open their changes to your code, which they may not be willing to do: so instead they'll contact you and pay for a commercial license.

Yes, it does matter which license you choose. If you don't specify a licence then by defaults all your rights are reserved, and no one will use your code (except dishonest people who don't care about licenses anyways). So if you want your code to gain visibility it's important to use an open-source or free license.

You could also go for a commercial license only. This makes sure no one can use your code (legally) without paying you, but you also run the risk that no one will bother.

redtuna
"but they have to open their changes to your code" only if the distribute a derived work. If all they do is use the code internally, modified or not, they don't have to release anything.
If this is true.. I think this is probably the reason why no one pays for jQuery as they never "re-distribute" it. Now I get it.
wailer
A copy of jQuery if distributed if it is served from a host related to the web site using it. But normally, jQuery is not *modified* so there are no changes that must be distributed with it.
Doesn't matter under GPL : you don't have to distribute changes, just source. Also, even if you didn't make changes you still have to distribute source.
MSalters
+2  A: 

The license is only part of the process. First you need to think of a business model. What is the value that a potential customer is willing to pay for. You can offer services, training, consulting, additional plug-ins/modules/features etc.

Depending on this analysis you then can look which license fits the best into your business model. That might be a dual license, might be only one. If your business model works better with your software being distributed widely, a more liberal license works probably better, and so on.

Hope this helps a little!

txwikinger
+2  A: 

Is your code really that good / worthwhile to go to all the effort? My advice would be that unless you have a truly awesome & polished product, pick a liberal license and add a paypal donation button on the website. If your code is popular you'll get extra kudos, and there are still possibilities for making money in the long term.

This may be a reflection of my own personal projects more than anything, but even so - I'd caution against getting all excited about selling your code until you know there's a market for it.

Thomi
Probably not :) So your suggestion is I should rather try to keep the code closed and find buyers. My main objective is to make a living and long term is not in my dictionary :)
wailer
If your goal is to make money, then I wouldn't use an open source license at all - as much as it pains me to say that (I'm a BIG fan of open source software). It's simply much harder to charge for your code when you're also giving it away. Anyone who claims otherwise is dreaming.Concentrate on polishing your product, and marketing it to potential buyers. Make sure it's usable from the point of view of your end users, rather than the developer (I can't count how many times I've seen people make *that* mistake).
Thomi
A: 

One option is to make the software freely available, and provide a consulting/support service for your software. Businesses may want your expertise in configuring or extending the software, or providing support when things go wrong.

This of course depends on what sort of software it is.

Artelius