www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ross Gardler" <r...@gardler.org>
Subject RE: license zero
Date Wed, 18 Oct 2017 05:53:48 GMT
There are other models that people interested in this topic might want to look at. These models
use trademark to enforce this kind of "payment requirement". Depending on the exact nature
of the problem you are trying to address there may be no need to get lawyers involved and
create a new license.

For example, Moodle (an open source learning management system used in between 30% and 80%
of the educational institutions in most countries of the world) is mostly developed by Moodle
Pty (an Australian company). Moodle Pty. own the Moodle trademark and license it to partners
who then sell services to those educational institutions. Larger institutions with an IT department
self-host from the open source bits. Both partners and self-hosters will often contribute
upstream in the traditional sense. All partners contribute cash to Moodle Pty and as such
get a say in feature prioritization.

One of the interesting things about this model is that it is compatible with all open source
licenses (and closed source too if you don't care about code contributions from non-partners).
For example, I can take Apache Foo, couple it to Project Bar and give it a fancy new trademarked
name that I then license to partners while community participants still get my open source
bits. 

In many ways this model brings the benefits license zero seems to be trying to create whilst
not involving too many new legal arguments. Of course, it also has its drawbacks, no model
is perfect.

Speaking personally... I see no problem with the sustainability of Apache projects. If the
software does something useful and people want to use it then it continues to be developed.
Sure, that's not a perfect model either, no model is perfect 😊

Ross

-----Original Message-----
From: Bertrand Delacretaz [mailto:bdelacretaz@apache.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 10:13 PM
To: legal-discuss <legal-discuss@apache.org>
Subject: Re: license zero

Hi Brian,

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
...
> [0] https://licensezero.com/

Interesting concept, makes me think of https://www.patreon.com/ but forces people to pay,
for commercial use, IIUC.

> ...[[Personally I think it could setup the right incentives if the 
> private license money's paid to a foundation...

I don't think Apache would ever get involved in such things, due to our strong "independence
from businesses" principles. Having a foundation act as a trusted third party sounds great
but I don't think the ASF can be that.

-Bertrand

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message