Creative Common Copyright Notice in Standalones

[Warren Samples]

On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 12:46 -0800, Jan Schenkel wrote: 
> --- On Sat, 1/8/11, David Bovill <david at vaudevillecourt.tv> wrote:
> > [snip]
> > 
> > Thanks for taking the time to respond - my interest is in
> > real business
> > models built around licenses, or other legal innovations -
> > and not the
> > politics :)**
> > 
> 
> Well, now that the topic has come up, I have a few questions regarding open source licenses which the community may provide better insight into.
> 
> Let's assume I want to make available a new Quartam Smurf Library for LiveCode, as open source. Ignore the Intellectual Property rights of Peyo for a second, it's just the first thing I could think of - I'll leave it up to the psychologists on this list to examine my insanity from that :-)
> 
> Anyway, Quartam Smurf Library offers a set of commands and functions to do with Smurfs. Let's say it covers the original 100 Smurfs. I want to give the rest of the community the opportunity to add support for the newer Smurfs that were added afterwards. The library has a number of 'core' commands and functions that are scripted as 'private' and are used by all 'public' commands and functions for the initial 100 Smurfs.
> 
> My main goals:
> - to make sure that I get proper attribution for my work
> - to make sure that anyone who uses the library shares their modifications with the rest of the community
> - to run an open community around the library to incorporate the welcome changes into new versions of the library
> - to also accommodate those LiveCode-using developers whose corporate policy prevents them from using anything GPL/LGPL/AGPL, by offering it in a commercial license as well
> 
> My main concerns:
> - it needs to cover Desktop, Mobile, Server and Web plug-in deployments
> - it shouldn't be a viral license that requires the whole program to be open source under the same license, just the modifications and extensions of the library
> - it should prevent commercial 'wrapping' of the library (*)
> 
> (*) what I mean by wrapping: some devious individual could decide to make a derivative version of Quartam Smurf Library, exposing just those core 'private' commands and functions by making them 'public' - thus enabling them to write a 'wrapper' library which is closed source and commercial, not sharing their extensions but making a profit of the work of the contributors.
> 
> In short, I'm willing to share my initial work, but others should also share their modifications and extensions with the community.
> 
> So far I haven't found the right license for this.
> - MIT is too liberal for this, I think
> - GPL is viral so out of the question
> - LGPL is close but its goal conflicts with Server and Web plug-in
> - AGPL has also turned out to be viral, after re-reading it a few times
> - MPL might be a candidate, but I'm not sure if it covers all the concerns
> 
> Can you guys and gals help me out?
> 
> Thanks in advance for the feedback!
> 
> Jan Schenkel.
> =====
> Quartam Reports & PDF Library for LiveCode
> www.quartam.com
> 


Jan,

If this is a new work which does not rely on other works, leaving you
unencumbered by the terms of some other prior license, then you are free
to take your terms to an IP attorney and have him or her create a
license that imposes your terms and your terms alone. In this case,
there is no need to handicap yourself or to accept any terms you really
don't find desirable. While the idea of using an "established" license
has some merit if we believe (imagine) that it means they are well
understood, accepted and adhered to, it's foolish to view any of them as
some kind of "Holy Grail", particularly if your circumstances don't seem
appropriate. 

Warren