Brian P. Martin wrote: > > My suggestion: GPL v.3 or later. > > What about the so-called "viral" component of GPL? If someone take a > script of mine and grows it into something bigger and better and > amazing, I don't think I'm concerned about how they license it. As long > as they don't restrict use of the original code or other people's > ability to also grow that original code, I'm OK with them selling their > new widget. > > This is more like the BSD license which basically says the user of the code can do what ever they want with it as long as they preserve the copyrights in the code, and the documentation must mention where the code came from. (real quick handwave of terms)
The GPL's primary term is the 'viral'-ness. RMS is a strong holder of the 'my way or the highway' position, but you'll notice that over time when people chose the highway, the edge became a bit fuzzy. The 'GPL linking exception' is the prime example - and I think only example. There are cases where one needs to link gpl code into an app which is not covered by he gpl and so some finely crafted exceptions were created to allow this. So if your code is delivered as a library this would work. You'll have to choose your own poison - Either the BSD license, or the GPL with linking exception allow what you want. you will have to decide which of the other terms of these licenses meet your intentions best? Steve > -Brian > > _______________________________________________ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
