From ruby-talk Fri Apr 15 09:34:18 2005 From: "Joshua J. Kugler" Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:34:18 +0000 To: ruby-talk Subject: Re: Practical considerations for licensing software written with dynamic/non-compiled languages/plat Message-Id: <200504150133.53138.jkugler () bigfoot ! com> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=ruby-talk&m=111355765710374 On Friday 15 April 2005 01:14, Matt Pelletier said something like: > What options does one have, as a company that produces software that > is distributed directly to clients/VARs, when that software is built > with a platform/architecture that uses a dynamic (non-compiled) > language, and further, when that platform and/or language is > open-source? This question qualifies for Rails and Ruby, but also it > could hold for PHP, Perl, etc. It really does come down to a matter of trust. You can put strong language in a license agreement, but it does rely on trusting your customer to not "take your code and run." Really. There are lots of examples, but a good one is: http://www.brownbearsw.com/calcium/WhatIsIt.html Brownbear makes a great bit of calendaring software. So good in fact, that I went with it for a project over every other open source calendaring solution I could find. Their entire product is written in Perl, which means you get (and can modify, but not distribute) the source code. They are still going strong, if their client list is any indication. Can someone steal your code? Yep. Do you then crawl in a hole and program no more? Well, that's really up to you. Everything with possible benefit involves risk, so you just have to decide how much risk you want to take. That's really the bottom line. Sorry if that was a downer...wasn't meant to be. j----- k----- -- Joshua J. Kugler -- Fairbanks, Alaska -- ICQ#:13706295 Every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess, in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, that Jesus Christ is LORD -- Count on it!