[geos-devel] Alternative licensing for GEOS
lr at pcorp.us
Thu Nov 9 08:52:56 PST 2017
I personally would be okay with that.
From: geos-devel [mailto:geos-devel-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Paul Ramsey
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2017 11:43 AM
To: GEOS Development List <geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: Re: [geos-devel] Alternative licensing for GEOS
Just randomly, if IBM licensed GEOS for $100K / year for five years, would that be acceptable?
One can write a lot of free software for $100K / year.
It's not uncommon for copyleft projects to self-support with relicensing deals. Wonder what our community members think about that.
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 6:16 AM, Greg Troxel <gdt at lexort.com <mailto:gdt at lexort.com> > wrote:
James Turner <james.turner at weather.com <mailto:james.turner at weather.com> > writes:
> We would like to know if alternative licensing is available for GEOS,
> as the object distribution requirements for the LGPL don’t really make
> any sense in iOS applications.
The key issue is that the permission granted is intended to be
conditioned on the user being able to do some things, and Apple chooses
not to let the user do those things.
The notion that "the iOS rules don't make sense" is an equally valid
viewpoint in this case.
Perhaps you could ask Apple to let users share Free Software that
they've obtained from the app store, with each other, and to add a way
for people to rebuild LGPL code, relink it, and install it on their
devices :-) Obviously I don't expect you to do that, and I don't expect
the request to be at all succesful, but this is basically why the Free
Software community is not receptive to "could you change your licensing
so I can distribute proprietary software via a mechanism that is
explicitly hostile to Free Software".
geos-devel mailing list
geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the geos-devel