On Thu, 2011-01-06 at 13:57 +0530, Binand Sethumadhavan wrote: > 2011/1/6 Kenneth Gonsalves <[email protected]>: > > no, rather "oh shit! now that I have accepted these contributions, I > > cannot use them in my internal company code without a lot of > headache". > > Or "Oh shit! this license does not suit my business model". > > Now we come to the crux of the matter - if you have accepted > contributions from others into your software (which you sell/support), > then you are no longer the sole author - you now move into the > "distributor" role. And of course, as I have been maintaining, > distributors who do not play fair and by the rules lose out in the GPL > world.
many people open source code in order to attract developers - and they would like to use such code in their closed versions, if they have such a business model. If it is GPL, then they have to only accept code where the copyright is assigned to them. In the BSD world, this is not necessary. I am making no comments on the morality of this model, but all I say is that if it is your model, then you need BSD. > > You obviously have the choice of not accepting third-party > contributions without a copyright assignment. only if it is GPLed -- regards KG http://lawgon.livejournal.com Coimbatore LUG rox http://ilugcbe.techstud.org/ -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
