Dear All, I'm seriously thinking of dual-licensing my software library macstl, in the style of Qt, mySQL, Berkeley DB et. al. with a GPL and a commerical license I have some questions though.
1. Doesn't the GPL prohibit un-GPL'ing the code? Or does dual licensing rely on having files with identical content but different licenses? 2. I'm uncomfortable with making contributors assign copyright to me, just so I can dual-license. Would it be sufficient to get them to send me a form email stating that they agree their contribution will be dual-licensed? 3. Any GPL-compatible commercial license templates I can look at? Especially those that are clear and short. 4. The GPL obviously doesn't prohibit commercial activity on top of the software, since Red Hat et. al. use services as a commercial model. Is there any OSI-certified license that would either encourage or compel commercial activity to have to use a different, commercial license? E.g. I note that the mySQL site phrases this as "quid pro quo" but not an enforceable requirement. For example, the Affero GPL tries to close the hole where someone uses the software to run a web service but then keeps the modifications private. But I don't see that the Affero GPL has been OSI-certified. Thanks for your answers. If you need to contact me off list, use glen dot low at pixelglow dot com. Cheers, Glen Low, Pixelglow Software www.pixelglow.com -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
