[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Nuitka - GPLv3 plus contribution copyright assignment

Hello Ben,

you wrote:

Am 05.01.2012 13:39, schrieb Ben Finney:
Kay Hayen<kayhayen@gmx.de>  writes:

First my intent: I believe intent matters in copyright. Please do not
discuss if my intent is good or bad, or if my approach will be
effective or not for a project.

Please don't attempt to set rules forbidding discussion of your intent
and approach. If it's relevant to the purpose of this forum – and I
suspect it is relevant – we are free to discuss your intent and approach
however we see fit.

You misunderstood me. Please assume that I wanted to avoid distractions.

So my intent was to release "Nuitka" as Free Software in compliance with
the DFSG. My intent was also to make a commercially viable fork of Nuitka
impossible until at a later time I choose to allow it.

Those are incompatible goals. The work can only meet the DFSG §6 if it
does not discriminate against any field of endeavour; by discriminating
against a “commercial viable fork”, you would discriminate against
commercial activity.

I know that.

I didn't forbid "commercial" use at all. What made you think that I do?

When explaining my intent, I just made it clear, that I do not - at this time - want a heavy investment by a competitor with the goal to sell Closed Source licenses. In principle I am not against that though.

Such a motivation to choose the GPLv3 license cannot violate the DFSG, can it? I would be very surprised.

(In case it's not clear, free software is quite commercially viable.
It doesn't seem that you are confusing “commercial” with “proprietary”,
but that bears clarifying anyway.)

I am quite sure I could make a living by selling Closed Source licenses of Nuitka. I have other plans for it though. I will benefit more from it, if it is as Free as CPython is.

So as I understand your goals, you must relinquish at least one of them.

I hope you will relinquish the goal of restricting commercial activity,
and instead pursue the goal of releasing your work under terms
compatible with the DFSG.

I think you were misunderstanding. The terms of Nuitka are GPLv3 and the clause I mentioned. The terms of the code generated are for the Nuitka parts, as they remain GPLv3 unless I would do something.

The question is merely, is that extra clause, which is much alike what Apache does (my own assessment at this time only), is acceptable. Because, if it is, I will be happy and Debian should be too.


Reply to: