Quote:
Since XOOPS is GPL code, to release it under another license would require rewriting it from zero, wouldn't it?
--Julian
It is my understanding that the copyright holder (Xoops.org) withholds the right to release XOOPS under other licenses. I could be wrong though.
This leads me to another question, would a dual licensing model (like MySQL, MAMBO or EZPublish) be another option? Essentially there would be two licenses available for Xoops, the free GPL license, or a commercial license giving the right to rebrand and sell versions of XOOPS and develop modules under a commercial license. The only thing I'm not sure of is if a module is developed under the commercial license, can it be used under the GPL version without taking on the GPL license itself? I've tried searching the web for an answer but haven't found anything yet to that exact question.
Could you restrict module use to only commercial versions? Thereby allowing people to develop modules for either the GPL version (open) or the commercial version (closed)?
Another question is how improvements submitted work. If an improvement is made to the GPL version, can it be included into the commercial version or does the improvement need to take on the GPL license???
Not really sure how mambo and eZpublish work this since I'd assume their software is essentially commercial and then grants a GPL cversion afterwords, since you couldn't do it the other way around... could you?
Gah, I've been reading licensing sites for hours now and I'm more confused then when I started. lol
I definitely think a dual license could be a possible solution that satisfies both sides, the GPL for free use, and the commercial for those wishing to do more with Xoops. The only thing I'm not sure of is how this would work with XOOPS since Xoops.org isn't really a company, while the site owns the copyright, no one person owns the site, or do they? Would Kazu?
References and discussions of interest:
Here's a great write from Mike Olsen at Sleepycat (Berkeley DB), a company currently using the dual license. Has some great reasons why a corporation would not use an Opensource product, but would if it were duel licensed.
http://www.linuxworld.com/story/33893_p.htm
FAQ on MySQL's Dual License
http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/licensing/faq.html
Interesting discussion concerning eZpublishings dual license
http://ez.no/community/forum/general/license_issues/re_gnu_gpl_license_finally_answers
Duel licensing as a marketing approach
http://management.itmanagersjournal.com/management/04/06/24/2057239.shtml