On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 06:22:15PM +0100, Elmar Stellnberger wrote:Perhaps you're interesting in reading our guidelines:
> Is it really a problem? If yes then I can add an exception for
> distributors like Debian.
http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines
point 8 is "License Must Not Be Specific to Debian".
That's OK. It just means you need to upload to non-free.
> However what I want is being noticed somehow about changed versions
> of my programmes.
That's not true; commercial software *can be paid software*. So long as
> This is to collect new use cases and get updates quickly
> incorporated (Early versions of
> my program were heavily rewritten and patched as googeling has
> shown; though that time
> not even granted explicitly.). Being notified by third party users
> about their concerns and
> changes would yield major contribution to the future development.
> (There are no copyright
> issues though since the actual code added by me so far has been
> completely different from
> the diversions found out there; though it has been very useful in
> extracting new use cases.).
> > o One may not change for the software (or use it in a commercial product),
> > or be used *from* non-free software as a plugin (etc). The phrasing
> > in here is odd.
> Well this is already the standard for the GPL-license: GPL programs
> as far as being
> compiled can not be incorporated into commercial software; you have
> to use L-GPL.
> Why not establish a similar standard for protecting intellectual
> property also for
> programs written in a script language? (i.e. this is the reason why
> I called it S-FSL).
the software is compatable (and the work on the whole is distributed as
GPL), this isn't a problem.
Please, if you don't know how the GPL works, I have to strongly insist
on you not writing your own license.
It's a lot more effort for the distributors to review this license and
> If the phrasing is odd we will have to rework it; it is my intention
> to have a license
> clear to everyone; not only to lawyers.
> >
> >I strongly encourage you to not write your own license terms. Please
> >consider using a well-known and understood license.
>
> Well to me it is an issue under which license to publish. I do not
> want to burden
> my distributor unncessarily but actually want to retain as much
> rights as possible
> because writing, maintaining the software and supporting also casual
> users is a
> major effort.
attempt to figure out how it applies in different jursidictions, with
other licenses and how to properly comply.
Cheers,
> >
> >Cheers,
> > Paul
>
> Many Thanks for your Commitment,
> Elmar
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org>
: :' : Proud Debian Developer
`. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag