Hi, > In order to improve the situation and make this software available to > a broader public I have once more designed a completely new license from > scratch: the so called 'Convertible Free Software License'. It's almost never a good idea to make your own license. And I know how you feel, because I've played with the idea of doing the same thing.[1] For one thing, there is the problem of license proliferation. The other, more important thing is that if you are not a lawyer, you have most likely done it incorrectly. There are probably many loopholes in what you have written, especially given the length of your license. Getting legal advice on drafting a license can be expensive, but in comparison to actually enforcing the license, it is cheap. If you're not willing to spend money on a lawyer now, you need to ask yourself whether or not you're ever going to actually enforce the license. If you don't plan on enforcing it, then it is worthless. Before you do get legal advice, however, there are some DFSG problems with this license. If you're still interested in making this license, let me know and I'll tell you the ones that I've found. Good luck, Riley Baird [1] My ideal license would mandate the American rule on costs and ensure that the right to modify, distribute, etc. must be preserved, but there would be no obligation to provide source code.
Attachment:
pgp8qzIWVtYd_.pgp
Description: PGP signature