Non-Profit LGPL

http://sanathkumarblog.wordpress.com/2013/03/05/non-profit-lgpl/

by sanathkumar • 13 years ago

1 5 13 years ago

sanathkumarblog.wordpress.com

dalke3• 13 years ago

This would not be a free license. It would not be compatible with the GPL:

"You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the rights granted or affirmed under this License. For example, you may not impose a license fee, royalty, or other charge for exercise of rights granted under this License"

Nor would it fall under the Debian Free Software Guidelines.

"The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license may not require a royalty or other fee for such sale."

"The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons."

sanathkumar2• 13 years ago

Thanks for pointing it out. I intended used the term LGPL to refer to the concept of allowing open source software to be used for commercial purposes. But in reality, this idea would need a license of it's own. Do you think such a license would be feasible?

dalke3• 13 years ago

There is no need to "[allow] open source software to be used for commercial purposes." That's already widely done. Open source and commercial software are not incompatible. Ask Google, IBM, Microsoft, Apple, and the Free Software Foundation.

But your essay wants to combing the concepts of "open source" and "mandatory licensing." Those concepts are mutually exclusive.

You need to read and understand the underlying moral philosophy being free software to understand why what you are asking does not make sense. Start with http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html .

Non-Profit LGPL

Related Stories