[Drawkit] DrawKit license

[Eric Jarvies]

Graham,

For starters, thank you for your effort and release of DrawKit!   
You've done a fantastic job with it thus far.

I think you should license DrawKit so that the 'free applications'  
community may use it for free(with properly crediting you), but  
commercial products must pay a license fee accordingly, respectfully.

Regards,

Eric Jarvies

On May 12, 2008, at 7:44 PM, Graham Cox wrote:

> The CC 2.5 license is probably the wrong choice for this. I realised  
> that after I went with it but haven't so far changed the headers to  
> something different.
>
> The intention isn't to have a "viral" type license like the GPL (I  
> didn't think CC 2.5 was like that, but anyway, it's not really ideal  
> for software). The fundamental intention, ultimately, is this:
>
> • Credit to the author (i.e. me) if you use my code in whole or in  
> part**
> • Changes/fixes directly made to DrawKit itself contributed back
> • No liability on my part if you use DrawKit and something goes  
> wrong or it doesn't live up to your expectations (i.e. no warranty).
>
> And the license should permit:
>
> • Commercial use (though I reserve the right to offer DrawKit under  
> alternative non-free licenses for commercial use on request).
> • No obligation on you to release any code that makes use of DrawKit  
> into the public domain.
>
> And specifically DrawKit's license does not cover:
>
> • Use of linked third party code such as GPC and potrace, which must  
> be licensed separately.
>
> If the LGPL covers all of these, then I expect we can change to use  
> the LGPL.
> I would appreciate any input on this, because licensing isn't  
> something I've really thought much about to any great depth.
>
> **the credit given should be in your "about box" credits if you have  
> them, and in your product's documentation. Exact wording to be  
> determined.
>
> cheers, Graham
>
>
>
> On 13 May 2008, at 4:21 am, Brad Larson wrote:
>
>> In examining the license for DrawKit, I see that it is using the  
>> Creative Commons 2.5 Share Alike - Attribution license.  It is my  
>> understanding that this operates in a GPL-like manner, where  
>> derivative works, including applications that link to the library  
>> or framework, must have their source released under the same  
>> licensing terms.  This presents a problem for us, as we would like  
>> to use the DrawKit view classes in a preview window for our main  
>> control software for one of our pieces of equipment, but cannot  
>> afford to open-source the entire control program.
>>
>> I know that I might stir up a flame war, but would an LGPL license  
>> for the DrawKit framework be possible?  That might help with  
>> adoption, especially with some of the indie software folks who may  
>> wish to incorporate the framework in applications for sale.  The  
>> framework and direct modifications would remain open-source, but  
>> the specific apps need not be.
>>
>> Sorry for the multiple posts, I thought that this deserved its own  
>> topic.
>>
>> ______________________
>> Brad Larson
>> SonoPlot, Inc.
>> 3030 Laura Lane, Suite 120
>> Middleton, WI 53562
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Drawkit mailing list
>> Drawkit at lists.apptree.net
>> http://lists.apptree.net/listinfo.cgi/drawkit-apptree.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Drawkit mailing list
> Drawkit at lists.apptree.net
> http://lists.apptree.net/listinfo.cgi/drawkit-apptree.net