On 5/18/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 5/17/05, Eric Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > With an NDA, this should be fine. Of course, there's a risk of it > > getting leaked if too many people get it, so even with the NDA, it > > shouldn't be free; this way, only serious people get it, and I believe > > there are some legal reasons why a contract is more binding when money > > is exchanged (something about 'consideration'), but IANAL. > > > > In any event, what should it cost? And it would be easier to roll the > > 'hobbyist' and 'commercial' license into one, where the up-front fee > > isn't too bad in either case, and there's also a royalty for each chip > > you produce. > > > > Suggestions? > > > > If you are confident on the law you could try a CC licence by-sa-nc (share > alike, non commercial) and give a date when the licence on the code became > GPL. > > If you're not, you could stay with your NDA with the promise of releasing > the code under GPL. You could release the GPL code 6 month after the > product launch so if somebody make an asic of it, you always have few > month in advance. But you have to improve the design each year or 2 to > stay competitive. >
That's the idea. We're taking the time-delayed approach to ensure that we can continue to improve the design. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
