Picking a license

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Fri, 14 May 2010 07:10:50 -0700, Ed Keith wrote:

> But if my client give someone else a copy of the binary I gave them,
> they are now in violation. I do not want to put my client in this
> position.

If your client is distributing software without reading and obeying the 
licence terms, then they are either idiots, or unethical, or possibly 
both.

If you want to make life easier on them by reducing the consequences of 
such foolish and/or unethical behaviour, that of course is your right. 
There are good reasons for doing so, and equally good reasons for not. 
It's also their right to ask you to assign copyright to them, or to 
licence the work using the MIT licence (or similar), or to ask for an 
exclusive licence. Or even to ask you to sign a "no compete" agreement 
which prevents you from ever writing code again. It's your choice whether 
to say Yay or Nay, and if you agree, how much you will charge for it.


> When using the GPL or LGPL you can do anything you want as long as you
> do not let anyone else use your work, but if you let someone else have a
> copy of you work you are putting them in a position where that can
> easily/inadvertently violate the law. I do not want to put clients in
> legal jeopardy, so I do not use GPL, or LGPLed code.

You're not putting them in legal jeopardy, they are. It is their decision 
whether or not to violate the licence.


-- 
Steven