Picking a license

[Ed Keith]

--- On Fri, 5/14/10, Patrick Maupin <pmaupin at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Patrick Maupin <pmaupin at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Picking a license
> To: python-list at python.org
> Date: Friday, May 14, 2010, 11:47 AM
> On May 14, 6:13 am, Lawrence
> D'Oliveiro <l... at geek-
> central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> > In message
> > <2b17ee77-0e49-4a97-994c-7582f86c0... at r34g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
> Patrick
> >
> > Maupin wrote:
> > > On May 13, 10:06 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> > > <l... at geek-central.gen.new_zealand>
> wrote:
> >
> > >> Under the GPL, everybody has exactly the same
> freedoms.
> >
> > > That's absolutely not true.  For a start, the
> original author can dual-
> > > license.
> >
> > That’s nothing to do with the GPL.
> 
> If you mean "that's out of the control of the GPL" I
> agree.  But the
> whole point of the discussion has been about how people
> can't take GPL
> licensed code proprietary, making enhancements, etc. and
> I'm just
> pointing out that this doesn't apply to the original
> author.  Someone
> can decide they aren't making enough money under the GPL
> and stop
> distributing that way, and make all their enhancements
> proprietary, if
> they are the original author.
> 

That is one good reason for choosing to use the GPL, instead of a less 
restrictive license. You can license it, for a fee, to someone who wants to use it in some way that is not allowed under the GPL. If you use a less 
restrictive license that is not an option. Of course you still could put 
restrictions on future enhancements, but the the original code cannot have 
new restrictions put on it, only taken off. If I release code under the GPL today, I can change my mind and release the same code under the Boost 
license tomorrow. But if I release it with the Boost license, while 
technically I can release it with the GPL tomorrow, in practice everyone 
will use the previously released Boost licensed version.

   -EdK

Ed Keith
e_d_k at yahoo.com

Blog: edkeith.blogspot.com