views:

423

answers:

5

I've few closed-source freeware programs which i distribute from my site. But some sites like qarchive and other freeware-download sites hijack my software and keep it on their servers. (They steal my traffic from website and earn by CPM/CPC advertisers) It's like parasite on my hard work. I want to restrict that. In order to do that i want to attach license to my freeware.

I'm looking for a License which grants user to download and use the freeware, but no modification. Also site distribution without permission should not be allowed. Which license to choose in this case ?

Which is the right license in this case ? Or It qualifies for any custom license ? Any suggestions and opinion on this are welcomed.

+2  A: 

IANAL but Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial might suit you. I don't see the point of adding "No Derivative" if you are just distributing a binary. You can choose and mix your own license at the Creative Commons (sorry, no link due SO not trusting me).

And even if you choose to re-release your software under a stricter license, the old one still apply for versions distributed earlier.

Sebastian
+3  A: 

Depending on your local laws they aren't allowed to redistribute your software anyway, adding a license won't change anything.

Licences can only grant permissions, not deny rights.

Georg
Yes, but if you check sites like qarchive. They're hijacking almost every freeware-author's software. This way sites like those are acting like parasite. Isn't it hurting freeware authors ? Only way they're earning money is from traffic to their site. and these parasites steal it. So with some license their should be restriction.
Mahesh
They won't even look at your license. Without providing a license, they are _not_ allowed to redistribute your work. I'd write them an email and maybe threaten to sue them.
Georg
A license that explicitly states "no redistribution" or something like that doesn't take away any rights - they have no right to from the beginning - but having it explicitly stated may give you a bigger leg to stand on if they violate it.
ceejayoz
Stating it explicitly doesn't improve your legal position.
Georg
The end user is bound to whatever the download sites care to include.. up to and including (some of them) claiming that they wrote it for 'community goodness'. The download sites realize that the author lives in a country where copyright is a foreign concept and make enough in one month to make the actual copyright holder rich, if only there was such a thing. This is, indeed an egregious breach of contract, which such sites get away with (and profit from) daily. The best case is to turn the tables and use them as they use you.
Tim Post
@gs: It's absolutely *amazing* to me how many people -- most professional software developers, included -- don't understand this basic concept.
Dan Moulding
+3  A: 

It doesn't make any difference what kind of license you choose for your freeware. Pirates and crackerz will steal it no matter what. The license might give them a good belly laugh, but nothing more. Seeking legal action against them might be effective but probably not, since it would cost you some serious money and at best would cause them to shut their operation down and re-open it with a new name.

MusiGenesis
@Pavel: according to the question, the sites that store his freeware mainly decrease the load on his bank account. I can understand his frustration with this situation.
MusiGenesis
@MusiGenesis: Licenses are one thing, _copyright_ is another. A simple complaint to Google, Yahoo and Adbrite cures most of the problem, should it come to that. What remains is sensibility, "How can I monetize this phenomenon of major networks distributing my stuff?" Its better to ponder that prior to being antagonistic. I'm adding +1 to this, because I think that's what you meant.
Tim Post
+2  A: 

You can use any text as your license agreement. There's no requirement for it to be written with use of long all-caps sentences full of words, that no one understands without reading three times. You want your soft to be not redistributable?--just add the restriction as separate point. It's important to divide your license into points, because, for example, in Russia a point that forbids redistribution is void, but the other points still have effect.

A good solution would be to copy-pase a license of any other software with similar terms. Of course, if you find it. It may be very hard to find such software, because it hides into the depths of badly-designed sites of their greedy authors. We can't give you a link, because no one knows about such software: it's not published on software sites like qarchive, where users can rate software, categorize it and find soft that suits their needs.

So you'll have very hard time looking for non-redistributable freeware. I wish you luck.

Pavel Shved
I copy-and-pasted a EULA once from another company without fully reading it, and it turned out to have a joke in it about agreeing to give up your first-born son to the software's authors. I got a few angry emails about that one.
MusiGenesis
hahahaha did that actually happen? Maybe the EULA authors were trying to check if someone would actually read it.
Camilo Martin
+13  A: 

Please read this answer in its entirety before reacting.

If your goal with this approach is to have relatively hassle free marketing for your services, your approach is untenable. You're going to deal with these headaches no matter what kind of license you have.

The download sites aren't going to read your license for the most part. They count on your apathy in enforcing your copyright , not just your license. That being said, here's some things to do:

  1. Report the links. Contact the ad networks themselves that appear on these pages (i.e. Google) and report the copyright violation. Google takes these very seriously, so do most other (reputable) ad networks.
  2. Talk with an IP attorney, really look into the cost of getting your own license drafted. Its as cheap as a few hundred bucks. The same attorney can then help you to enforce it, if needed.
  3. Have your program check for periodic updates, which takes people to a download link on your site should one be available. That helps put what the download sites are doing to work for you rather than against you.

Big names have this issue too, just not to the extent that you have it. They employ people to look for this and send take down letters on the spot. Again, looking at your business model, you simply do not have time for that.

Really, really, really try to find a way to make this a positive thing, complaining to the ad networks as a last resort. Try to find more ways to plug your site in the app itself without annoying users.

Tim Post
Thanks, this is the perfect way to proceed in such cases.
Mahesh
+1, very comprehensive answer.
fmuecke