On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Zluty Sysel <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion. > All options will be considered but our original hope was to be able to > require attribution to everybody with some exceptions (i.e. certain > customers). > This is not a 'waiver', it's a second license. Your statements indicate that you want to be able to distribute the software under two licenses: BSD, and a BSD-like license that does not require attribution (which might be the 'zlib' license). To achieve this, you'll need to obtain that level of licensing flexibility from your contributors. As has been noted by others here, there are multiple options available: * Copyright assignment: heavy weight, difficult for corporate copyright holders, seen as a significant barrier to contribution * Contributor license agreement providing broad licensing privileges: somewhat common, but seen as a barrier to contribution because the contributors are granting you the ability to license their contributions under any license you wish * Contributor license agreement providing specific licensing privileges: more likely to be perceived as 'fair', if the contributors only grant permission to distribute their contributions under the two specific licenses mentioned In the end, though, it's probably much easier to just use the zlib license. There may be some people who will choose not to contribute due to the lack of attribution obligations, but those same people would likely not contribute if a copyright assignment or contributor license were required.
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
