Am Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:07:01 +0100 schrieb Cinly Ooi <c...@theiet.org> :
> Unfortunately, people standing here are not going to modify the Open Source > Definition so that you can charge a subset of users. Freedom to > redistribute is the cornerstone of the Open Source. We cannot change it, > even that wee bit, just for you. I believe when drafting the definition, > situations like yours were already considered. As I see it, you are not If it was only my situation, I wouldn't have asked. But I'm also an Open Source Evangelist and FSFE member and have detected this common pattern with Open Source projects becoming mature, usable, successful. They don't fit into the Open Source world any longer and start escaping into dual licensing, Open Core, closed source forks or only older versions remain free. Not only the projects are lost but there is also a brain drain of programmers. Another brain drain pattern: talented young programmers turn away after their first half finished Open Source project for a real job. Whether this was considered or not, I can imagine a better overall situation but it all boils down to breaking the money barrier. -- Pirmin Braun - IntarS Unternehmenssoftware GmbH - Am Hofbräuhaus 1 - 96450 Coburg +49 2642 40526292 +49 174 9747584 - skype:pirminb www.intars.de p...@intars.de Geschäftsführer: Pirmin Braun, Ralf Engelhardt Registergericht: Amtsgericht Coburg HRB3136 _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
