In demand


Friday, March 27, 2015

Why can't software be like automobile parts?

 I  really want the Content Connection Kit  to be licensed in a manner that will promote development of extensions and visual themes without forcing anyone to use opensource licensing. I also don't want  developers and designers to be restricted by my own need to sell the core software under derivative works restrictions. I want people to be able to run their own companies making extensions and visual packages without fear of violating the core package licensing. I would like them to be able to trust in the fact that what they bring to their clients and customers is something they can do as a business.

I would like the license to reflect a situation similar to that of the aftermarket auto industry or computer parts industry. Where the purchase of the original product does not influence the development, pricing and guarantees of the parts manufacturers.

Let's say the CCK package is like a  Chevy Camaro  and  the extensions and themes are tires, suspension, paint and other accessories. Clearly  Chevrolet does not claim that the aftermarket manufacturers of these  parts to do be part of  Chevrolet or it's business.  They are just providing parts that fit and work on the cars carriage. Their aftermarket guarantees, sales and distribution are their own.

I have looked around and found no software company that promises and delivers this kind of openness to it's users and developers. So I am trying my best to create a license that is permissive in the since that it will promote developers to be business partners.

The only model I can think of that fits is Microsoft and Windows  where creating software on the Windows platform does not require much of anything. But developers are not allowed to reverse engineer and compete against Windows by taking it#s libraries and creating a new Windows version.  But the MS license is miles long. There must be something between, permissive yet proprietary . I also really hate the GPL or any copyleft licensing as they  do  the opposite of what I want to promote.

So here's a few lines from the license that I am struggling to write.

Open development and Aftermarket: Extensions, modules and themes working with the software and not included in the original packaged source are considered to be seperate entities from the originating core. Royalty free use of the core is granted to the creators of aftermarket extensions. Extensions and visual enhancements, themes to this software are the sole property and responsibility of their creators whom are free to sell and distribute within the limits of the copyleft restriction. Copyleft Restriction: No part of the this software, derived works or aftermarket extensions of the software may be distributed under any copyleft license. The licensee may not use copyleft software to extend and enhance a larger derived work for distribution or sale.

Has this been done before? Are there any examples of companies that run in this direction?

Today's Links

Post a Comment

Print this!