I all, I've not yet submit any patches for Openvpn but I would like to write a little as I will surely provide a patch in few days/weeks.
I totally agree with your vision James. Openvpn main aim is to provide a free/libre alternative to proprietry SSL VPN. I think the main aim is not to make of Openvpn *the best VPN software ever build aimed to be largely selled*. Now to resolve the funding issue, the project should license Openvpn like MySQL/Reiser, with dual licensing. But the main problem will be that OpenVPN will probably have to provide commercial support or anything like that. Is openvpn ready for that? Best regards too Didier CONCHAUDRON > Open Letter to OpenVPN developers and users > ------------------------------------------- > > This message is primarily directed at individuals who have submitted or > plan > to submit source code patches to the OpenVPN project. > > I've been considering various ways that the OpenVPN project might become > financially self-sustaining. While this has been discussed in the past, > the > discussion usually centered around donations. I'd like to propose and > invite > discussion on another potential fundraising method. > > Hans Reiser (ReiserFS developer) and separately the MySQL project have > pioneered a dual-licensing scheme where the source code remains under the > GPL > license, but can be alternatively licensed under a standard commercial > license > that allows customers to modify the code or link with non-open-source > code, > without being required to publish their changes. Funding is generated by > selling commercial licenses to the same codebase which is available to the > general public under the GPL. As Hans Reiser bemuses, the commercial > license > amounts to "taxing money from those who can't convince their investors > they > should share their code with us." > > Being able to sell commercial licenses would bring badly needed funding > into > the OpenVPN project to help with the increasing workload of maintainance, > support, etc., and ensure that OpenVPN continues to evolve in the > direction of > becoming a universal open source VPN solution. While most OpenVPN users > would > continue to use the GPL license, an example of the type of user who might > want > a commercial license would be someone who wants to sell a network > appliance > which uses a modified version of OpenVPN as the security layer, and who > wants > to keep their modifications proprietary. > > Of course, if software is licensed under the GPL, only the copyright > holder > for the software is legally entitled to dual-license under a different, > non-GPL license agreement. > > Therefore, in order for a dual licensing scheme to work, anyone who has > ever > submitted code to the OpenVPN source code would need to agree to the dual > licensing scheme, since their code might now be potentially licensed under > a > commercial license (in addition to the GPL). > > There are different forms in which this agreement can be legally stated: > > Here is Hans Reiser's version: > > http://namesys.com/legalese.html > > I'd like to invite some discussion on this idea, and I'd especially like > feedback from past OpenVPN contributors as to whether this is something > they > could agree to. > > Best Regards, > James
