Re: [Wxdevide-devs] code license consern

[Esteban A. B. <nab...@ya...>]

1- We need a license that states that all derivative work needs to have the original sources open, and prominently  acknowledge the existence of the original project (we) and link to us.

That's GPL. Everything that touches GPL code needs to be GPL. It's why they call it "GPL poisoning".
 
Maybe that's how "derivative work" is commonly defined, but what I'm refering to here would be "code that depends in some way or another in our code"; I've called it derivative code for lack of a better term. Let's make an example: the library FastMM4 does not depend in any way in our code to work,... that's not "derivative work", so it could remain licensed on it's original terms (in that special license we are looking for), even if we use it in our project... GPL doesn't permit this; if our project is GPL'ed we cannot compile both and distribute them togheter.If someone takes wxDevIDE, changes the icons and recompile it with a different name, that would be derivative work under my definition... then that would be required to have the same license terms as our work.

2- None of the derivative work can be reselled without the explicit concent of the original autors or the current project administrators. We can open it up for reselling at some point if the project seems to be abandoned in terms of improvements.

That one is pretty difficult to do outside of a closed source license. Even with GPL, a user may take the original source code, build it (without modifications), and sell the binaries for millions of dollars. The point of GPL is that he can't sell the source code (and must give it away freely to anyone who wants it).


But that's because GPL explicitly permits that. That's why I'm saying that we would need a different license if we wanted that. I guess there should be some license with those terms (of top of my head I think Creative Commons have some options in that regard). Note that I'm not saying that that makes it any more easy or hard to stop someone from breaking the license... the point here is that the correct license will give us the legal base to prosecute someone legally in case that our license were abused. 
3- 3rd party code included can remain licensed on it's own
 terms.
You've just contradicted requirement #1. 3rd party code would be considered a "derivative work"
 
Not using my definition of derivative work. By 3rd party code here I'm refering, again, to code that doesn't depend on our's (Jedi Libraries for example). Sorry for not being clear.





      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Premios MTV 2008¡En exclusiva! Fotos, nominados, videos, y mucho más! Mira aquí http://mtvla.yahoo.com/