Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've been trawling through many pages about software licensing and it's a real brain-beater. Legal stuff just isn't interesting, although I do know that I must release my code under a license, otherwise I'd just end up with problems later on down the road.

 

So I've just finished a rich web-based media manager, and I'm getting around to releasing it. It uses jQuery (including a JSON plugin, and SWFUpload). All code is my own, apart from the JSON plugin and SWFUpload (both released under MIT License, which I believe allows me to use them, I hope).

 

My code will be open-source. There are a few things that are worrying me.

 

 

[*]If I release it as open-source, do I lose my rights as the original copyright owner?

[*]Really, which license should I be using if I want people to be able to use it for free, change it how they want, redistribute the ORIGINAL work (not the changed work).

 

 

 

Really, I just think I'm being over protective of it. All I want to do is release it to the public, but still retain my ownership over it, since I created it.

 

Any pointers as to where I should go? I've been looking at the GNU GPL, but not entirely sure.

 

Regards.

Yeah I suppose, it says people are not free to change it how they want, which is what I want. But then it says it can be approved by the copyright holder, it seems alright.

 

I've just always seen the GNU GPL and well, yeah. Not entirely sure. I'll take a bit more of a look at that one though, thanks.

Yeah I suppose, it says people are not free to change it how they want, which is what I want. But then it says it can be approved by the copyright holder, it seems alright.

 

I've just always seen the GNU GPL and well, yeah. Not entirely sure. I'll take a bit more of a look at that one though, thanks.

 

Yeah, the GPL route would probably be better. The one I linked isn't really made for software I guess, but it has the same principles behind what you are looking for.

I want people to be able to use it for free, change it how they want, redistribute the ORIGINAL work (not the changed work)

 

I'm not sure there are open-source licenses like that around. Generally, your free to modify and then redistribute the modified code as long as the original author is still credited and the original license remains n place.

I want people to be able to use it for free, change it how they want, redistribute the ORIGINAL work (not the changed work)

 

I'm not sure there are open-source licenses like that around. Generally, your free to modify and then redistribute the modified code as long as the original author is still credited.

 

Even under the GPL? I wasn't too sure about that. I mean, I wouldn't mind if people modified it and then distributed it, as long as I was still credited.

Okay, sorry for the double post but I'm now decided between the BSD License and the MIT License.

 

From what I've read, both are very similar. They allow the end-user complete freedom with the code, however the copyright notice and license must remain. I think I'm leaning more towards the BSD License.

 

Anyone have anything to say about those two licenses?

If I release it as open-source, do I lose my rights as the original copyright owner?

 

No. That will only happen if you release it to the public domain.

 

Yeah I suppose, it says people are not free to change it how they want, which is what I want. But then it says it can be approved by the copyright holder, it seems alright.

 

CC by-nd only prohibits redistribution of derivative works. It doesn't prohibit people from modifying it as long as they don't redistribute it.

Yeah, I should have realised about the Public Domain, by bad there.

 

Yeah I suppose, it says people are not free to change it how they want, which is what I want. But then it says it can be approved by the copyright holder, it seems alright.

 

CC by-nd only prohibits redistribution of derivative works. It doesn't prohibit people from modifying it as long as they don't redistribute it.

 

Sorry, but what is CC by-nd? Creative Commons?

 

I think I'm going to steer clear of the GPL, and opt for either the MIT or BSD.

Sorry, getting too muddled with all these damned licenses. Everyone should just release under the WTFPL (link may offend).

 

I think that [CC by-nd] license is to restrictive now that I've been reading a lot more into it. I'm leaning more towards the MIT License now, mainly after reading this article. It provides a pretty good comparison.

I suggest using the Berkeley Copyright or a variation (eg. BSD, Apache). I suggest looking into Apache's method though. It is pretty much the same as BSD's except that people who modify the source must make sure that if they release a modified version of your software it has a different name.

http://www.openbsd.org/policy.html Have a look at that for some ideas

This thread is more than a year old. Please don't revive it unless you have something important to add.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.