Zikula Community

• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Helper
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 676

  Posted: Dec 25, 2004 - 01:31 AM

  Being GPL doesn't mean you can't sell it, only that you can't make it proprietary and closed source. You can provide a demo of how wonderful your module is, and then require payment for each download. You cannot prevent them from redistributing it, but usually provided the price is fair or modest, people are happy to go to the source and support it. Even though they might not click on Donate links, they WILL click a Buy button if they really want it. The internet provides for the possibility of small payments, since there's no distribution costs other than bandwidth. $5 may be all you need charge, whereas a commercial distributed CD might be $50.
  Depending on what it is, it may include unlimited updates, ie they buy a registration for the site which gives them access to Downloads. That wouldn't work for multiple modules though, unless the specific download groups are only made available to specific User Groups, eg Product1 group, which they buy access to.
  The main problem from the customer's perspective is a lack of trust in e-commerce and the security of credit card info, which using PayPal etc can go some way to alleviate, but never completely. I wouldn't entrust my card number to just anybody.
  
  Bottom line, you cannot take over a "dead" project and slap a non-GPL license on it (or whatever license it's under), unless you got prior written permission from the original Developer, which he might have good grounds to object to, unless he sold it to you.
  I have seen a few Open Source projects where the developer has a free Lite version, but maintain an enhanced proprietary version, which might not even have the same code base for all I know. They sometimes say it's a different branch, an optimised version.
  
  I understand there's one legal precedent for the GPL standing up in court, from Germany, where the country's specific laws would have made it far more likely for it to fail. The OS developer took several router makers to court, the defendants used a specific German legal argument to invalidate the GPL under German law, but it failed. The court declared the GPL valid. I think I read it on SlashDot once.

  • 
  •  
• Slugger
  
  

  • Rank: Expert
  • Registered: Mar 11, 2003
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 1104

  Posted: Dec 26, 2004 - 05:47 AM

  I think someone needs to review their options carefully before releasing anything new under GPL. There are other ways to introduce an open source project which may be more appropriate licensing options. This is something all developers should learn about before releasing anything.
  
  Slugger

  • 
  •  
•  
•  

Users on-line

• mazdev

This list is based on users active over the last 60 minutes.