Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-uk - Re: [Cc-uk] FW: creative commons licences

cc-uk AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Cc-uk mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Rob Myers <robmyers AT mac.com>
  • To: Stuart Yeates <stuart.yeates AT computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>
  • Cc: cc-uk AT lists.ibiblio.org, mllxkcsb AT yahoo.co.uk, flowow AT yahoo.com
  • Subject: Re: [Cc-uk] FW: creative commons licences
  • Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 14:54:40 +0000

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.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page