Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
An "enum" for Python 3
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
Ie., have them sign something that said "you can relicense it, but you'll have to pay $x to J. Hacker".
Advice appreciated on community contributions approach
Posted Oct 29, 2009 12:58 UTC (Thu) by kripkenstein (subscriber, #43281)
For example, if you want to relicense a few years later, and can't get ahold of all the original contributors to pay them, that would be problematic. Or if something happened to them you need to find their next of kin.
Maybe it could work in this way: If you relicense, you need to publicly advertise that fact, and the authors then have the option to contact you for $X within 1 year from the announcement.
Not sure how I feel about that approach, though. For one thing, would it be $X per contributor? Then 1,000 lines of patches are the same as 1? Or is it by lines of code? Seems troubling either way.
Posted Nov 6, 2009 0:23 UTC (Fri) by Wol (guest, #4433)
I suspect I'd settle for "you give me the right to exempt people from the requirement to provide source, provided the binaries are unmodified".
That way, I could licence commercial companies to sell a binary-only, "proprietary" product, but they would lose the right to make proprietary changes. If they wanted to change the source, they would have to give their changes to me for me to make them freely available, in order to be able to distribute their changes.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds