A discussion of hybrid open source and proprietary licensing models.

["Matthias Urlichs" <smurf AT smurf.noris.de>]

Hello,

before writing such a license, the first question should be:

        Do we in fact need (another) one?

There are existing licenses that work and fulfill the requirements
of, e.g., the Open Source Definition[0] or the Debian Free Software
Guidelines[1]. The QPL (qt toolkit) is one example.

Another approach is to dual-license. MySQL is perhaps the most prominent
success story of that approach.


So the first question I have for anybody who wants to develop a bundle
of new licenses -- no single license is appropriate for everybody -- is:

        Which goal (and _whose_) is not served by either of these approaches?

plus

        Is that goal compatible with an Open Source approach
        in the first place?


Note that any such license will meet close scrutinity from many Open
Source advocates. The fate of version 1.0 of the MPL (Mozilla) should
teach a lesson here...


[0] http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
[1] http://www.debian.org/social_contract.html#guidelines

-- 
Matthias Urlichs   |   {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de   |  smurf AT smurf.noris.de