Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Which kind of licene to choose ?

Author
Message
Freddix
AGK Developer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2002
Location: France
Posted: 31st Mar 2020 14:13 Edited at: 31st Mar 2020 14:14
Hello,

If there are people that are skilled in understanding licences ( MIT, LGPL, APACHE, Creative Commons), please help me.

I plan to release PluginKIT for AppGameKit Classics & Studio.
It will be composed of AppGameKit source codes with many functions to handles all sets of commands I've added in.

I'd like to release it on GitHub with licence that cover :
- You are not allowed to redistribute PluginKIT as Source code modified or not without explicit agreement from the original author (me)
- Contributions to the project will be allowed using Branches system in GitHub
- You are allowed to distribute freeware, commercial, shareware, etc. if PluginKIT is NOT the product itself (you are allowed to create and distribute executable of games or applications that uses PluginKIT with AppGameKIT if PluginKIT is not THE product distributed itself)
- You cannot claim that you are the author of PluginKIT, even if you contribute. You can only claim that you are the author of your contribution.
- Contribution (as source code) mades to PluginKIT must be released using the same licences use.
- Contributos agree to allow users of PluginKIT with their contribution, to use their contribution under the same licence term as original PluginKIT product.
- Product is released as donationware. That mean it is not required to pay to use it under the licence term but, donation are accepted to help developer continue PluginKIT and create new products for AppGameKit community.

Do you know if there is an existing licence type that cover these ?
Raven
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 31st Mar 2020 17:06
Microsoft Public License ... MS-PL is what I tend to use.
It's short enough that most people will actually read it, and it does cover most of what you're looking for, with the exception of redistribution of the Source.

Creative Commons 4.0 also will protect you as the original "Artist" against redistribution and non-transformative plagiarism.
You could always use a Custom License though., after all a License Agreement is merely a list of Permissions and Conditions; the only real difference between the "Commonly used" ones and what you'd write; is they've already been translated into Legalese.
Which the Legalese is important to ensure that no one can find a "Loophole" to get around the agreement.

Given what you specifically want., I'd say don't provide the source on a Public GitHub... instead keep it on a Closed GitHub that you can Grant / Deny access to, and get each individual who wants to access it to sign (digitally) a Standard License Agreement.
(I tend to call this approach NVIDIA "Open Source"... as they generally don't get the concept of Open Source Projects)

Actually thinking about it, might be worth looking at the NVIDIA License Agreement... they tend to be super protective, might be exactly what you're looking for.
Phaelax
DBPro Master
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Apr 2003
Location: Metropia
Posted: 31st Mar 2020 17:07
I'd think an LGPL might suffice here. In that license, they don't have to share source code of their project that uses your library. But any work based on your library or modifications to it does require they share that code. If you used GPL, then anyone using your library would have to release their product under GPL as well. LGPL allows them to release their product under their own licensing terms but you still maintain ownership of the library.
Tiled TMX Importer V.2
XML Parser V.2
Base64 Encoder/Decoder
Purple Token - Free online hi-score database
Legend of Zelda

"I like offending people, because I think people who get offended should be offended." - Linus Torvalds
Freddix
AGK Developer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2002
Location: France
Posted: 1st Apr 2020 13:30
Thank you Raven and Phaelax for your answers that "'light my torch"

@Raven : your ideas are good, but I don't want to force people to sign an agreement to get access to the plugin. so I will not choose NVidia licence style ....

@Phaelax : I will look carefully to LGPL to understand it... English is not my native language so it's not always easy to understand all points of a licence type (as usually, they're long ...)

Thank you both
Freddix
AGK Developer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2002
Location: France
Posted: 1st Apr 2020 16:52
@Phaelax : After checking the LGPLv3 licence, it appear that if PluginKIT is released under LGPL Licence, anyone that will use PluginKIT in their program will have to licence their program to LGPL v3 ... And I don't want that... Peoples that create games, applications with AppGameKit and using PluginKIT must have the choice to remain "closed source" ... LGPL v3 does not allow this...
Phaelax
DBPro Master
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Apr 2003
Location: Metropia
Posted: 13th Apr 2020 23:39
I had the understanding that PluginKit would be included with the app under LGPL but the app itself could be whatever. Why is licensing so complicated!
Tiled TMX Importer V.2
XML Parser V.2
Base64 Encoder/Decoder
Purple Token - Free online hi-score database
Legend of Zelda

"I like offending people, because I think people who get offended should be offended." - Linus Torvalds
Raven
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 14th Apr 2020 02:29
Licensing is complicated because it's the realm of Lawyers / Solicitors who are Professional Pedantic Arguers... the Technicalities and Loopholes are where they thrive.

Now as to why most are in English... well it's generally because the English Legislation is one of the most protective and party agnostic.
Not in all things, but when it comes to Business Contracts (such-as NDA, Licenses, etc.) it's excellently impartial.
Provided you have an Office (and thus at least a Shell Company) located in the US / UK... you can in essence force all legal challenges to occur under those Legal Frameworks., by citing them as the "Protected by US/UK Legal Code..." (whatever protects said contract)

As noted there are two forms of Contract, Implicit and Explicit... and Implicit like LGPL are excellent., just keep in mind you're actually not protected at all if you have no claim to said legal system.
So in your case you'll want the French / European Union variant.

Hope that helps.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2020-10-01 01:16:12
Your offset time is: 2020-10-01 01:16:12