Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 00:35:23 -0700 From: David Southwell <david@vizion2000.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Cc: Aryeh Friedman <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Can the following license be used for ported programs? Message-ID: <200709240035.23926.david@vizion2000.net> In-Reply-To: <20070923224312.GA83208@owl.midgard.homeip.net> References: <bef9a7920709231010r3f52b894v4c30856322291c74@mail.gmail.com> <20070923224312.GA83208@owl.midgard.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday 23 September 2007 15:43:12 Erik Trulsson wrote: > On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 05:10:53PM +0000, Aryeh Friedman wrote: > > My company develops software under a commercial "open source" (see > > links for details) and I want to know if my license is close enough to > > open source (see links for why it is not 100% OSD compliant [it is 95% > > compliant]). Specifically does the business model as outlined in my > > blog (the third installment should be out later today), my business > > model page, the third party certifier and license allow for inclusion > > in the ports collection. Keep in mind that the source is available > > to anyone but execution is conditioned on attachment A of the license > > and after the trial period (30 days) is paid for software. > > > > License: http://www.flosoft-systems.com/license.php > > Official statement of my business model: > > http://www.flosoft-systems.com/bmodel.php > > Blog entries: > > http://www.flosoft-systems.com/blogs/aryeh/FOSS.php > > http://www.flosoft-systems.com/blogs/aryeh/SIW_Background.php > > Third party group (due to DNS issues is currently hosted on my domain > > but is not officially associated with my company): > > http://www.flosoft-systems.com/miai/ > > For inclusion in the ports tree it really does not matter much what license > you use for your software - it could even be a commercial closed-source > program. The reason for this is that the ports tree is just a framework > for installing and managing software packages, and none of your code will > actually live in the ports tree. > > If you have various restrictions in the license then it may not be possible > for the FreeBSD project to distribute binary packages or source files. > If that is the case the port creator should set RESTRICTED or other > appropriate variable in the port Makefile to enforce this (see > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/porting-r >estrictions.html for what variations are possible.) Frankly I do not see the point. New software would have to be highly original not to have its objects fulfilled by a pure open source prokject rather than some contrived license. First look at the competitive merits of the software against works available -- not at the liocensing!! David David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200709240035.23926.david>