License for Code?

[cosc19z5@bayou.uh.edu]

> cosc19z5@bayou.uh.edu writes:

> > I don't particularly care what license we follow as
> > long as it allows for free development and distrubution
> > and prevents code from being "appropriated" by commercial
> > entities who then slap their own license on the code itself.
> 
> My code will not be GPL'ed.  I *want* companies to be able to use my
> code, so that there become more systems out there that are built using
> Scheme and modern implementation techniques.  I just don't want them
> to be able to appropriate my code and claim it's theirs.

I want some level of commercial use to be allowed, and like you
I don't want them claiming it is theirs.  Whether or not I
want commercial entities to use the end product, or have license
to use the code in other applications is up in the air (for me),
but I can waffle either way when the time comes :).

> 
> I've not decided finally, but I will likely use the BSD license form
> or the RScheme one.
> 

My prime concern is in third parties taking our code and claiming
it is theirs.  As long as that concern is addressed, I feel
pretty flexible with any license.  

I didn't mean to sound like I was trying to ram GPL down anyone's
throat.  I was just suggesting one possibility.


> I'm not saying this to try to convince anyone that they shouldn't GPL
> their code, but simply to say that if that is a requirement of
> software ``provided'' to the project, it won't include my code.

Which is enough to get me to reconsider using the GPL.  So, vote
anyone?  Since I think it's important that we all use the same
license, we should agree on that right now.

We definitely need to allow some commercial use, for therein
lies the key to success (in terms of distribution that is).


> 
> ../Dave
> 

Regards,
Ahmed