gpl or open-source or proprietary...

graemef · 01-20-2007, 06:35 AM

If you release the source code to a program then you are allowing anyone to look at that code, use it and improve on it. Depending upon the license under which it is release the improvements can be release under a different licence or the same.

If you want financial gain from your hard work (not unreasonable) then there are a number of options available to you.

You can sell the code you can still release the source code but only to those who pay for it. However by selling the code you limit your users to just those who are willing to pay for it up front.

You can release the code for free and then sell support to you work. This has an advantage of making it available to many people, increasing the user base, but many will never request for support.

You can release the code for free and then charge people to add enhancements to the code.

You can release the code for free and then hope that someone likes it and thinks that through their marketing channels they could make money from it and look for the original coder to hire them to lead the enhancement process.

jlliagre · 01-20-2007, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by linuxcbon

In my opinion , if I put my code under license which is :

- open-source : I give up all my rights and I get no benefits, except being proud of being copied for free.

You are confusing open source with public domain. You keep your rights under Open Source compliant licenses, although the GPL, which is OSI compliant is promoting the Copyleft concept.

Quote:

- gpl : I protect my rights and people are not allowed to steal my work.

Steal ? If you give something to people, and then they decide to sell it, it is their right
If you deny them this right, then your code is proprietary.

Quote:

But is there a way to know if a closed-source software is using my code ?

By reverse engineering it and demonstrate your code was used.

Quote:

And if so, how can I stop those people to do so ?
And how can I get compensation for theft ?

By suing them. Not for theft but for breaking your license

Quote:

So I think it is very hard to protect GPL code from theft.

It is hard to protect anything from theft,

Quote:

- closed-source : the best way to protect my work. But people cannot derivate new softwares from it.

As already wrote, you certainly can decide to use your own license.

linuxcbon · 01-20-2007, 12:03 PM

Please could you explain what are the rights under Open Source compliant licenses ?

yes steal : what is some companies are using code under gpl and don't want release their code ? Look at http://gpl-violations.org/
You call it license breaking... but isn't it theft ?

jlliagre · 01-20-2007, 12:25 PM

This page isn't talking about stealing but says "there are license conditions that are to be fulfilled". This is license breaking, not theft.
Anyway, what you want - forbidding people to sell derived work from your code - isn't covered by the GPL.

linuxcbon · 01-20-2007, 12:59 PM

Then what is the utility of releasing the code ?
Better keeping it secret to avoid any of those problems.

[KIA]aze · 01-20-2007, 01:29 PM

If you use the GPL, then even if other people sell software derived from your code, those that buy it can copy it as much as they want and redistribute it for free!
The only obligation is to always give access to the source code of the software.
This means that if your software is improved by others, you'll benefit from it because you'll have access to the improved source code (and the software).

That's what's so great about the GPL.

And concerning the enforcement of the GPL, here's a recent news about GPL enforcement against Cisco:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/17/2327204

The enforcement of the GPL is not easy, but it's still better than no protection at all.

If you haven't done it yet, you should also read the GPL FAQ:
English version
French version

P.S: A french site on strike... ROFL ^^
I wonder what effect it will have if Google goes on strike one day. :s