In an answer to a question about the GPL, David wrote,
If your CMS is something that others
might want to build on, you can
dual-license it. In this case, you
want to release under the GPL or
similar to prevent somebody else from
taking the F/OS code and taking it
proprietary. Some companies have done
very well doing this.
- What are some good examples of such a ‘dual license’?
- What is the nature/summary of the other, non-GPL license?
- Why would some customers want the other license? If they’re developers, is it so that they can use your library in their own closed-source product? If they’re end-users, is it because your GPL-license is for a less-capable version of your application software?
- If others do build / have built on top of what you released via the GPL, is there any way for you to use those additions in your own closed software? Might your license say, “this is GPL and anything you derive from it is also GPL, except that I (the author of the original thing) can also use your additions in my closed-source software”?
- Do you agree that GPL is the best open-source license to use, when you are dual-licensing?