What license should we use for free addons that we still want to protect from MIT/GNU?
Permalink
This is a question mainly for frz,
on another thread you mentioned that really free addons should be released under MIT.
Our argument was that we may want to use free addons as an entry door for paid ones (or for services), so we would like them to be shielded from MIT/GNU threat here.
Would you suggest us to come up with our own license?
on another thread you mentioned that really free addons should be released under MIT.
Our argument was that we may want to use free addons as an entry door for paid ones (or for services), so we would like them to be shielded from MIT/GNU threat here.
Would you suggest us to come up with our own license?
I totally don't follow.
You can release free (in cost) stuff under the MIT or GPL license in our marketplace.
Those licenses are very different.
There's no threat limiting what you can and can't do in terms of redistribution or "paid pro" versions under the MIT license.
The GPL does create more restrictions around the idea that people should be able to get subsequent works based off the GPL codebase at no cost in some capacity, but this could be a small download link to a package someone would have to know how to install by hand. As long as the code's available..
Regardless, I'm not a lawyer - you should do some deeper digging on if MIT or GPL makes more sense for your vision, they're very different.
You can release free (in cost) stuff under the MIT or GPL license in our marketplace.
Those licenses are very different.
There's no threat limiting what you can and can't do in terms of redistribution or "paid pro" versions under the MIT license.
The GPL does create more restrictions around the idea that people should be able to get subsequent works based off the GPL codebase at no cost in some capacity, but this could be a small download link to a package someone would have to know how to install by hand. As long as the code's available..
Regardless, I'm not a lawyer - you should do some deeper digging on if MIT or GPL makes more sense for your vision, they're very different.
So it's a case of:
- if you want to protect your free add-on, stick to the marketplace licence
- if you want people to hack/copy/extend/enhance/clone your free add-on, select the MIT licence
I got the impression that Franz was suggesting that those that have released free add-ons should simply review the licenses selected. He was probably encouraging free stuff to be MIT, but I didn't get the impression anyone was going to make any changes or enforce free stuff to be MIT.