Cc-uk mailing list

[Rob Myers <robmyers AT mac.com>]

On Thursday, February 24, 2005, at 02:42PM, Stuart Yeates 
<stuart.yeates AT computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> wrote:

>This is related to "dual licensing" which is common in the open
>source world. MySQL, Sleepy Cat and TrollTech all have successful
>business models which involve licensing their software for free as
>open source or commercially to be used in closed source software.

Yes, that makes sense.

Being commisioned to modify a work or produce a new one on the basis of 
exposure of CC'd work would possibly relate to the support/services model .

One thing about MySQL is that you can use it under the free license for 
commercial projects anyway, as you are unlikely to modify the program itself. 
Rather you will talk to it using SQL.

Providing software under a dual license ensures its continuing availability, 
providing consumers with a guarantee that their investment will be protected 
(and that they won't be locked in to a single vendor). This should make the 
software more appealing to risk-averse consumers.

>http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/licensing/
>http://www.sleepycat.com/download/licensinginfo.shtml
>http://www.trolltech.com/products/licensing.html

Berkeley and Qt are different to MySQL in that you can't use them in a 
proprietary setting under a free license. This has to do with the fact that 
they are support code rather than a complete program like MySQL.

I've seen MySQL take some criticism on Slashdot for misrepresenting the GPL 
(free license) in order to make paying for something you could use for free 
anyway seem more attractive. Certainly the services/support/editorial model 
is truer to the Free Software ideal and requires less distortion than the 
dual licensing model.

- Rob.