Re: OpenSource vs. Commercial

Danijel Tkalcec (RealThinClient) wrote: 
What do you say about the RTC Core Open Source license agreement?



Hi Danijel,

you mean this license?

http://www.deltasoft.hr/rtc/download.htm

I am not a good license interpreter <g>, but this is just my interpretation.

It seems clear that you want to maintain your 'logo' attached to the component set? Do you want millions of forked RTC Core components of good and bad quality with your logo attached existing out there? I think it might also be difficult to defend this license in court. I suggest you rather use a pure or modified MPL (Mozilla Public License) with perhaps additional clauses for example. This way contributors send their modifications to the coordinator - in this case yourself to be potentially included in the core set. This ensures that there are not millions of forked RTC Core components out there! Remember you are still the owner of the core source - unless main contributors want their contrubutions licensed under more open terms in the future or want their logos listed as contributors - only fair IMO. It depends on what you want to achieve with the components. To have only one source tree means developers have to download from your wevsite which helps to market your company. Look at the successful Virtual Treeview component from Mike Lischke for example. It is licensed under dual license MPL or GPL.

Hope the info is useful to you.

Very good website by the way! I have not used/was aware of your components, but it looks very impressive. From that alone I would not hesitate if I had to compare between commercial and OSS !
(At the moment I use kbmMW components for multi tier stuff)

All the best :)

siegs
.

Relevant Pages

  • RE: Creative Common Licence
    ... and choose the license you want by filling out a short questionnaire. ... The "logo" it ... some form of copyright control over their creation under terms they define. ... become like a .pdf file and the copyright logo unerasable. ...
    (microsoft.public.word.docmanagement)
  • Re: Creative Common Licence
    ... I ran the test on a .doc Shauna and it stayed as such. ... Plus the fact that the logo could be erased and the .doc changed inspite of ... My basic understanding of the CC license, ... become like a .pdf file and the copyright logo unerasable. ...
    (microsoft.public.word.docmanagement)
  • Re: Modern Tcl logo anyone?
    ... Just wanted to make sure it has a free use license. ... that Ruby really exists for Rails, and those are all web apps. ... whitespace and the graphics/image on each page. ... New logo ideas accepted ... ...
    (comp.lang.tcl)
  • Re: Creative Common Licence
    ... When you pass the mouse over the logo, you do get instructions to press CTRL ... Dave Neve ... My basic understanding of the CC license, ... become like a .pdf file and the copyright logo unerasable. ...
    (microsoft.public.word.docmanagement)