Re: What is the most restrictive DFSG approved "Commercialism prohibited"
Evan Prodromou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 2006-22-11 at 00:06 +0200, Jari Aalto wrote: > > I need to talk to upstrem that wants to prohibit commercial use of the > > software. What Licence I should suggest to him? > > > > The current hand written license permits the software to be used in > > GPL programs -- except the ssoftware cannot be used for commercial > > purposes. > > Prohibiting commercial use is incompatible with the DFSG. > > 6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor > > The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the > program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not > restrict the program from being used in a business, or from > being used for genetic research. > > Typically people who are opposed to commercial use are really opposed to > commercial _exploitation_. They don't want their work to be used > unfairly or selfishly. A copyleft license like the GPL can prevent some > of the more egregious misuses of a piece of software, but not all. Ok, so what is the most "restrictive" license that I might be able to discuss with the upstream. I mean -- in the sense, that when software would use that license, it would be hard to use the software for commercial purposes / exploited. Is the winner Good Old (tm) GPL; of all the choices? What specific arguments would you suggest I could while talking with the upstream to persuade him to make the move to another license? Jari -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: What is the most restrictive DFSG approved "Commercialism prohibited"
Jari Aalto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Evan Prodromou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Typically people who are opposed to commercial use are really > > opposed to commercial _exploitation_. They don't want their work > > to be used unfairly or selfishly. A copyleft license like the GPL > > can prevent some of the more egregious misuses of a piece of > > software, but not all. > > Ok, so what is the most "restrictive" license that I might be able > to discuss with the upstream. I mean -- in the sense, that when > software would use that license, it would be hard to use the > software for commercial purposes / exploited. You really need to know more about what the copyright holder wants to prevent. As stated, "for commercial purposes" isn't something that can be prevented without the result being non-free software. Ask them what *specific* acts they want to prevent, and (as far as you feel comfortable) ask them why. Try to find actions that you think are reasonable and ask if they agree (e.g. distributing the software for a fee; customising the software and selling the result; etc.) > Is the winner Good Old (tm) GPL; of all the choices? It certainly is the one best understood. It is a copyleft, which means that no-one can gain by placing additional restrictions on the recipient; if you explain this to the copyright holder, you may be able to convince them that this is an acceptable limit on the actions they don't like. > What specific arguments would you suggest I could while talking with > the upstream to persuade him to make the move to another license? Try to get them to see things from the recipient's point of view. Free software is about ensuring the recipient has exercise of certain freedoms in the software, without demanding that the software creator relinquish *all* their rights. Copyleft is about ensuring that the recipient can't then take those freedoms away from someone else. That might be enough for the person you're talking with, in which case, the GPL is the best-understood and most-popular copyleft license. -- \ "I busted a mirror and got seven years bad luck, but my lawyer | `\ thinks he can get me five." -- Steven Wright | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: What is the most restrictive DFSG approved "Commercialism prohibited"
On Wed, 2006-22-11 at 00:06 +0200, Jari Aalto wrote: > I need to talk to upstrem that wants to prohibit commercial use of the > software. What Licence I should suggest to him? > > The current hand written license permits the software to be used in > GPL programs -- except the ssoftware cannot be used for commercial > purposes. Prohibiting commercial use is incompatible with the DFSG. 6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research. Typically people who are opposed to commercial use are really opposed to commercial _exploitation_. They don't want their work to be used unfairly or selfishly. A copyleft license like the GPL can prevent some of the more egregious misuses of a piece of software, but not all. ~Evan -- Evan Prodromou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The Debian Project (http://www.debian.org/) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
What is the most restrictive DFSG approved "Commercialism prohibited"
I need to talk to upstrem that wants to prohibit commercial use of the software. What Licence I should suggest to him? The current hand written license permits the software to be used in GPL programs -- except the ssoftware cannot be used for commercial purposes. Jari -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
