On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Andrew Shadura wrote: > There's a project which isn't free software nor is it open-source (as > they haven't found a monetisation model which would allow them to open > the sources), but they'd like be able to have it in non-free section. > They've asked me to give them ideas on what to change in their current > EULA to make that possible.
Their primary distribution channels are the usual suspects in mobile (iOS, Android, Amazon, Samsung stores). I would suggest that most users of these services are not going to have the skill-set required to compile their apps from source. So their income streams from these channels are pretty safe and there is no reason not to release the source under a free software license. The only problem with that model is accepting contributions from the community could be problematic if choosing the GPL/LGPL. Other licenses would work though. I would strongly encourage them to reevaluate the market for their software, especially the piracy side of things. > So I'd like to ask someone to review the license (I've attached the > file they gave me) and give me advices on what it'd be good to change. > Please comments on everything — not sure every change will be accepted > by them, but more problematic things we'll have here discussed, more > possibilities to change them. The only requirements for non-free are that Debian, our mirrors and CD distributors can distribute the software. Since it is pretty easy to become a Debian mirror or CD distributor and anyone can do it, that means there needs to be a public gratis distribution license, which sounds like it goes against their business models too? >From the EULA it sounds like there is some sort of DRM, is that the case? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6gobuojmdjrdvqxtol1ar87apenspjcuopghlzc5ml...@mail.gmail.com
