LGPL would probably be the best choice, meaning they can use the code for commercial however need to submit/supply source code changes that they make to the CMS directly, but allows them to keep their own unique code built on top of the CMS closed if they want.
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Mariano Reingart <reing...@gmail.com> wrote: > The magic keyword is "distribute", both the GPL and LGPL would > prevent proprietary closed forks (binary only releases). > > But, if you want that every site that uses your app would have to publish > the source code, AGPL. > > Best regards > > Mariano Reingart > http://www.sistemasagiles.com.ar > http://reingart.blogspot.com > > > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Bruno Rocha <rochacbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Bruce Wade <bruce.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I agree with Anthony, I think this type of license will limit the >>> adoption greatly. Honestly I probably wont even look at the code now, not >>> because I wasn't interested. Instead because 99% of my clients require to >>> keep the code that makes their system unique and profitable. >>> >> >> I am open to change it, but I dont know nothing about licenses. >> >> Which license should I use if I want to allow free and commercial use and >> at the same time avoid someone form using the code base to release a >> commercial version os the same kinf of app? >> >> I mean, everyone should be able to use it to create a Social Network, >> intranet or website, everyone should be able to sell apps made with it and >> give commercial support. >> >> But no one can release a "CMS or Social network platform" free or >> commercial without making the source code available. >> >> Is there a license? >> >> >> -- >> >> Bruno Rocha >> [http://rochacbruno.com.br] >> >> > -- -- Regards, Bruce Wade http://ca.linkedin.com/in/brucelwade http://www.wadecybertech.com http://www.warplydesigned.com http://www.fitnessfriendsfinder.com
