Re: [HACKERS] Re: Revised Copyright: is this morepalatable?

JanWieck(at)t-online(dot)de (Jan Wieck) writes:

> Trond Eivind=?iso-8859-1?q?_Glomsr=F8d?= wrote:
> > Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> writes:
> >
> > > This is not something new. SunOS, AIX, HPUX, etc. all have (at
> > > one time or another) considerable BSD roots. And yet FreeBSD
> > > still exists... All GPL does is 'poison' the pot by prohibiting
> > > commercial spawns which may leverage the code.
> >
> > GPL doesn't prohibit commercial spawns - it just requires you to send
> > the source along.
>
> So if someone offers $$$ for implementation of Postgres
> feature XYZ I don't have to make that code open source?

You don't have to tell the world they can have it for free - you can
sell it, and develop it by demand.

> Only need to ship the code to the one paying

Yes.

> (under NDA so he cannot publish it) and grab the money?

An NDA can't be done, but you certainly can grab the money. If he
wanted you to add a feature, he could pay you for it.

> That's currently possible with our license,

With GPL as well - you just can't deny the customer to distribute the
source if he wants to.
>
> No question, the result will finally get contributed so
> everyone benefits from it. The reason why someone is even
> willing to pay that amount is just to get me out of my
> dayjob, focussing on his problem NOW, so it's done in a
> month.

That would certainly be possible.
--
Trond Eivind Glomsrød
Red Hat, Inc.