Re: License for selling software?
-g. writes: > First, is it okay to sell the software? Of course. Nothing prevents you from selling GPL licensed software. You just have to comply with the GPL. > ...I wouldn't want them to be able to redistribute it. Then don't use a GPL library. You'd probably make more money if you distributed your program under the GPL, though. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: License for selling software?
On 1/6/07 11:21 AM, "John Hasler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You'd probably make more money if you distributed your > program under the GPL, though. Why? Thanks. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: License for selling software?
Sáb, 2007-01-06 às 13:34 -0700, News User escreveu: > On 1/6/07 11:21 AM, "John Hasler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You'd probably make more money if you distributed your > > program under the GPL, though. > > Why? Have you considered "why not"? Red Hat doesn't seem to have much trouble doing so. Rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? signature.asc Description: Esta é uma parte de mensagem assinada digitalmente ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: License for selling software?
On 2007-01-07, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Have you considered "why not"? Red Hat doesn't seem to have much trouble > doing so. Red Hat makes money by selling software that other people wrote. I doubt they make enough to pay for the hours invested by those other people. (I'm not saying what RH is doing is a bad thing, but it's different from what the OP is doing - making money with software he wrote) Merijn -- Remove +nospam to reply ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: License for selling software?
Dom, 2007-01-07 às 12:16 +0100, Merijn de Weerd escreveu: > On 2007-01-07, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Have you considered "why not"? Red Hat doesn't seem to have much trouble > > doing so. > > Red Hat makes money by selling software that other people wrote. > I doubt they make enough to pay for the hours invested by those > other people. > > (I'm not saying what RH is doing is a bad thing, but it's different > from what the OP is doing - making money with software he wrote) They write a lot of the software they include, from kernel to desktop, so I'm not sure your reasoning applies. Rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? signature.asc Description: Esta é uma parte de mensagem assinada digitalmente ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: License for selling software?
Merijn writes: > Red Hat makes money by selling software that other people wrote. They make money selling service. All of that software is available cheaper elsewhere. > I'm not saying what RH is doing is a bad thing, but it's different from > what the OP is doing - making money with software he wrote Red Hat writes quite a bit of software. Everyone who uses Linux uses some of it. Most of them do not pay Red Hat anything. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: License for selling software?
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Have you considered "why not"? Red Hat doesn't seem to have much trouble > doing so. Red Hat sells a product for which people want a high level of support. It doesn't sound like the OP's product is one that would need a lot of support. -- --Tim Smith ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: License for selling software?
Tim Smith wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Have you considered "why not"? Red Hat doesn't seem to have much trouble
> > doing so.
>
> Red Hat sells a product for which people want a high level of support.
Red Hat sells only support ("services for each installed system", not a
product.
Red Hat has invented rather interesting "freedom 0"/"use freely" (for
one thing it doesn't begin until a year later after contract end).
>From RHAT's 10Q:
Our subscription-based contract model may encounter customer resistance.
The subscription agreement used for many of our products, including
Enterprise Linux, requires customers to agree to a subscription for our
services for each installed system on which they deploy our
subscription based products. At the same time, the subscription
agreement places no restriction on the customers right to redistribute
the products. While we believe this practice complies with the
requirements of the GNU General Public License, and while we have
reviewed this practice with the Free Software Foundation, the
organization that maintains and provides interpretations of the GNU
General Public License, we may still encounter customer resistance to
this distribution model. To the extent we are unsuccessful in
promoting or defending this distribution model, our business and
operating results could be materially and adversely affected.
Quoting Red Hat's Subscription Agreement:
The term "Installed Systems" means the number of Systems on which
Customer installs or executes the Software. The term "System" means any
hardware on which the Software is installed, which may be, without
limitation, a server, a work station, a virtual machine, a blade, a
partition or an engine, as applicable. The initial number of Installed
Systems is the number of copies of the Software that Customer purchases.
Note that "Software" is contractually defined term.
The term "Software" means the subscription
Now, since it's just impossible to install and execute on a computer a
*subscription* (a legal arrangement for providing software), they must
mean software (not Software) in the definition of "Installed Systems".
And here's the hammer:
If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed System, then
Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each
additional Installed System. During the term of this Agreement and for
one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right
to audit Customer's facilities and records from time to time in order to
verify Customer's compliance with the terms and conditions of this
Agreement. Any such audit shall only take place during Customer's normal
business hours and upon no less than ten (10) days prior written notice
from Red Hat. Red Hat shall conduct no more than one such audit in any
twelve-month period except for the express purpose of assuring compliance
by Customer where non-compliance has been established in a prior audit.
Red Hat shall give Customer written notice of any non-compliance, and if
a payment deficiency exists, then Customer shall have fifteen (15) days
from the date of such notice to make payment to Red Hat for any payment
deficiency. The amount of the payment deficiency will be determined by
multiplying the number of underreported Installed Systems or Services by
the annual fee for such item. If Customer is found to have underreported
the number of Installed Systems or amount of Services by more than five
percent (5%), Customer shall, in addition to the annual fee for such item,
pay liquidated damages equal to twenty percent (20%) of the underreported
fees for loss of income and administration costs suffered by Red Hat as a
result.
regards,
alexander.
--
"You see Free Software has been so successful because we have shown
we can develop software without any money. Volunteers do it. We don't
need to have money to develop powerful large programs. But we
certainly need to have money if we're going to buy patent licences."
-- Richard Stallman
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
