<div style="direction: ltr;"> I think we should consider a grace period hack, like that proposed in the following:<br><br>Quoted with the author's permission:<br>"One thing that I have learned, though, is that sometimes a GPL'ed or
<br>LGPL'ed project can actually get *more* users than a BSD'ed project,<br>because some people think that the GPL/LGPL'ed project is more likely<br>to survive and grow over time. BSD'ed projects sometimes die out
<br>because too much of the development goes on behind closed doors and<br>stays there. This is one possible explanation for why Linux is a 900-<br>pound gorilla of operating systems, when the technically comparable<br>*BSD Free Software operating systems are tiny niche players --
<br>because the BSD projects have historically suffered from companies<br>trying to use BSD OS'es commercially without contributing all that<br>much back to the public sphere. By contrast, the vast majority of<br>Linux development for the last half-decade or so has been done by
<br>large companies (IBM, Novell, SGI, RedHat, NetApp, Sun) who are<br>obligated to release their work by Linux's GPL licence.<br><br>On the other hand, there are plenty of people who strongly prefer a<br>BSD licence over a GPL/LGPL licence if they have a choice.
<br><br>So the motivation to get more users might suggest a GPL/LGPL licence<br>or a BSD licence, depending on who your potential users are.<br><br>An additional option is a grace period clause for either GPL or<br>LGPL. As compared to the standard GPL or LGPL, the grace period
<br>might encourage companies to use the code more than they would<br>without it.<br><br>Examples:<br><br>Grace period hack for GPL:<br><br><a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="http://allmydata.org/trac/tahoe/browser/COPYING" target="_blank">
http://allmydata.org/trac/tahoe/browser/COPYING</a><br><br>Grace period hack for LGPL:<br><br><a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="http://allmydata.org/source/pyutil/pyutil/COPYING" target="_blank">
http://allmydata.org/source/pyutil/pyutil/COPYING</a><br><br>Regards,<br></div><span class="sg"><br>Zooko"</span><br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/27/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Bruce Southey</b> <<a href="mailto:bsouthey@gmail.com">
bsouthey@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Hi,<br>You probably read the information provided by the Software Freedom Law Center
(SFLC) on including permissive-licensed in GPL code (or probably any code that is more restrictive than the BSD license) at: <a href="http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html
</a><br><br>Also, please take very careful note the terms of the BSD/MIT license actually used just in case there are no surprises (like unexpected additional terms). <br><br>Note also that the whole package may be under a different license provided components have compatible licenses. Thus, the Linux kernel is GPL V2 but contains code under other licenses like BSD.
<br><span class="sg"><br>BRuce</span><div><span class="e" id="q_115484e3b10ce46f_2"><br><br><pre><br></pre><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/27/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Titus Brown</b> <<a href="mailto:titus@caltech.edu" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
titus@caltech.edu</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 10:33:20AM -0700, Glen Otero wrote:<br>-> 1) Do the BSD and MIT licenses allow someone to modify BSD/MIT<br>-> licensed code to create a proprietary product, sell the product, and<br>-> *not* permit people to redistribute the new product?
<br><br>IANAL, but BSD/MIT does not restrict your ability to license your own<br>code under whatever license you care to use. So while you can't<br>relicense the BSD/MIT code, you can place your own code under a<br>
restrictive license.
<br><br>-> 2) If 1) is true, then how does one keep the original license intact<br>-> and also include a license for the product that doesn't allow<br>-> redistribution?<br><br>I think you would just license your own code under a proprietary
<br>license.<br><br>--titus<br><br>p.s. I would like to take this opportunity to encourage people to<br>*write* and *release* some code. License discussions are all good and<br>well, but ... what are we licensing? ;)<br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>biology-in-python mailing list<br><a href="mailto:biology-in-python@lists.idyll.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">biology-in-python@lists.idyll.org
</a><br><a href="http://lists.idyll.org/listinfo/biology-in-python" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://lists.idyll.org/listinfo/biology-in-python</a><br></blockquote></div><br>
</span></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>biology-in-python mailing list<br><a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:biology-in-python@lists.idyll.org">biology-in-python@lists.idyll.org
</a><br><a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="http://lists.idyll.org/listinfo/biology-in-python" target="_blank">http://lists.idyll.org/listinfo/biology-in-python</a><br><br></blockquote></div><br>
<br clear="all"><br>-- <br>"...the policy of preparing oneself for tough choices by arranging to be determined to do the right thing when the time comes is one of the hallmarks of mature responsibility..."<br>--Dan. D.