Ok, the other thing you need to think about is contributions of others
down the road. If you do the dual license, then all contributers have
to agree to let you also distribute under a comercial license
(basically give you the copyright). You could try to figure out a scale
to pay them when you recieve money for comercial use, but gets tricky.
I think MySQL mostly pays for outside code, or for small things some users might give the copyrights to MySQL with no payment.
Anyway, the one thing is that the dual licensing trick can inhibit
contributions by the "community". You might think about BSD, like
PostgreSQL, so that you can freely accept community contributions, but
you can also sell custom designs to other parties. Sure, anybody could
sell custom designs, but, the project might grow faster and be more
successfull.
Also, even under the GPL, you can charge for custom design, since most
will not have a problem with the fact that it is open. For me, I would
prefer it that way, so that I was not an orphan with an unsupported
design.
I am not trying to push you one way or another, but I might go the GPL
route and accept contributions where the contibutors retained their
copyright for the contributions, and you sold custom modifications
released under GPL, that could be folded back intot the main design if
they were good. Remember, for you to be most successfull, you want the
most users and the most creative input from outside. To make the most
money, you need a successful project with lots of users, and lots of
smart people contributing. The consulting money for custom designs will
flow from that. People will want you to do the work since you are the
one that will know the design inside and out more than anybody else. I
really doubt that you would lose many customers that did not wan their
design public. On the contrary, with the dual license trick. you might
lose some inovative contributions that would make the project take off.
Well, it is not all black and white!! Good luck!!
On 5/6/06, pickanameanditstakensoihavethis <> wrote:
actualy i am the only hardware designer that has contributed to it
atm
the last suggestion of a dual licence seems the best option and fits
in with the goals for education and encurageing open development
while allowing for totaly embedded modified solutions for the design
also
it will remain gpl and the dual licence system will be looked into
and some licencing agreement drawn up for those who wish to do non
gpl modifications
going to take a day or two to contemplate the best way to go
and to find suitable terms for a commertial licence for it
dave
--- In "Don W. Carr" <> wrote:
>
> Sun has also GPLed Sparc design and multi-threading tech as well:
>
> http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS6194768111.html
>
> Yes, GPL is much more common for software, but people are using it
for
> hardware designs.
>
> And, you GPL the design, anybody can make hardware from the
design.
>
> Also, for the software running on the GPL hardware, there would be
no
> problems with running proprietary code, but you would not be able
to make
> proprietary changes to the hardware design. All derived works of
the
> hardware design would also have to be GPLed.
>
> Not sure what compiling a hardware design would consist of in a
legal sense
> though. Is that when you turn the design into actual hardware???
>
> On 5/5/06, pickanameanditstakensoihavethis <>
wrote:
> >
> > --- In "Mark Carlson" <carlsonmark@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On 5/5/06, pickanameanditstakensoihavethis <donotsendmail@>
> >
> > wrote:
> > > > well the licencing has been set to gnu gpl in order to cover
> > the
> > > > software , ip cores and hardware , but the hardware may have
to
> > > > change to a more bsd like licence as it looks like a gpl
will
> > > > prevent manufactuers form making a profit from
manufactureing
> > it,
> > > > and as without profit it would not be worth making, that
will
> > need
> > > > to be checked and changed to allow it, if it is the case
> > >
> > > Quick question:
> > > I'm no licensing expert, but since you've already released the
> > > hardware as GPL, don't you have to keep it that way now?
> > (Derivative
> > > works and such) Or am I incorrect? Is there a way to release
it
> > > under the BSD license now?
> > >
> > actualy it is more to do with the fact that the gpl licence is
not
> > relavent to hardware it will prpbably remain gpl but a modified
> > version of gpl for hardware ,, i was aware that there was an
attempt
> > to create a gpl licence for hardware a couple of years ago , but
> > still searching for it atm ,think nothing came of it because no
one
> > could agree on it
> >
> > the gpl licence had been used as it covers the software and ip
used
> > so was carried on to the hardware, but interestingly the gpl
> > licencing only covers the documentation in printed or other form
and
> > media that it might be stored on, but fails to cover any
hardware
> > made from it , only the schematics and artwork in printed form ,
and
> > not the physical pcbs once made , from what i can tell atm
> >
> > ie a built up unit is not what the licence has covered it only
> > covered the instructions on how to do it,
> >
> > even if not the assembled pcb could be considered media and
costs
> > of producing that is allowed
> >
> > as the copywrite holder for the design the hardware has almost
a, do
> > as you will make as you want build into whatever you like
> > licencing with it but give us credit along with the usual
disclamers
> > to everything , but the gpl is what the default ip cores will
be
> > using ,
> >
> > the big point that i think has been causing most concern is the
fact
> > that if the whole system is gpl it may prevent use as an
embedded
> > product with a non gnu ip and software ie say a set top ip tv
box
> > the licence needs to ensure that that use is posible without
> > affecting there ip if thay wish to keep that closed source
> > that is not intended and not what we will want , and afaik not
what
> > the GPL licence will require of them
> >
> > although whatever licence gets used it will only allow less
> > restrictions than the gpl on the hardware side that is appearing
to
> > be less and less sutable to cover it
> >
> > dave
> >
> >
> > > -Mark
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> > Linux
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >
> > - Visit your group "ts-7000
> > on the web.
> >
> > - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Don W. Carr
> J. G. Montenegro 2258
> Guadalajara, Mexico
> +52-333-630-0704
> +52-333-836-4500 ext 2930
>
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "ts-7000" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
=Unsubscribe
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
--
Dr. Don W. Carr
J. G. Montenegro 2258
Guadalajara, Mexico
+52-333-630-0704
+52-333-836-4500 ext 2930
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "ts-7000" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
=Unsubscribe
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|