Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
We are evaluating PostSharp for logging purposes to use in a our project (implemented in .Net). Currently it is running in production enviroment. Can mixing with PostSharp raise licencing issues? As far as I know it is partially free. Am I wrong? What future licencing problems (i.e. is PostSharp planning to be non-free for future releases) can we face, if there are any?
The PostSharp licensing FAQ explains this in great detail.
Can mixing with PostSharp raise licencing issues?
You're unlikely to have future problems if you don't link to the part that actually does the transformations (that's PostSharp.Core). PostSharp.Laos and PostSharp.Public are what most applications will typically link to.
As far as I know it is partially free. Am I wrong?
It's all free as in beer, unless you (1) link to Core and (2) need to distribute your app outside your company. In that case, you have to buy a license. Core is released under GPL.
See the licensing options, which neatly summarizes answers to both those questions at the top of the page.
Related
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm thinking about the usage of ikvm.net. While ikvm.net has a license which can be used by commercial applications, openjdk will be developed under GPL.
My question is due to the fact that ikvm.net is delivering an openjdk .net assembly does this effect the application which is going to use ikvm.net?
The following is my personal opinion and may be wrong. I am not a lawyer.
The license of the OpenJDK is GPL+linking exception and not simple GPL. This means you can write commercial application that based on OpenJDK. The writing of commercial application is the cause for the linking exception.
IKVM has also not the problems of Android because the license is not more free like a Apache license. The OpenJDK part is continue under the GPL+linking exception.
The larger problems are the patents. The patents for Java can only used if the TCK passed. IKVM does not pass the TCK. I think never has test it.
But the most patents are invalid. Thanks to Google. The most patents are more related to the VM self and not to the API. Things like Garbage Collection and Reflection are not part or IKVM. This are features of the .NET Framework.
In some weeks we will know more. If Android has no patents problems then IKVM has also no patents problems.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I saw this on the licensing information section on the Jira website
JIRA is free for use by official non-profit organisations and charities (proof of non-profit status is required). There are certain organisations whose purpose is to make the world a better place, and we believe in helping them achieve that.
Community licenses are designed for organisations which are:
* non-profit,
* non-government,
* non-academic,
* non-commercial,
* non-political and
* secular
What does the last bullet point actually mean? Does it mean that if you believe in God you cant have a free license for a bug tracking software product?
I would imagine that you as an individual may believe in God(s), but the organisation itself should not be a religious organisation.
I actually asked Atlassian support the very same question a year ot two ago and they said that they don't do community licenses for churches etc. Seemed a bit restrictive to me.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I seem to recall hearing at some point (I believe it was MIX09) that Microsoft has a licensing model of some sort where a business can consume licenses for up to two years, free of charge, until they reach a point where they are stable position and can pay their licensing at the end of two years. However, I can't find information regarding it online.
I want to say that possibly stackoverflow used this licensing model to kick start their site. Is anyone familiar with this?
In addition to BizSpark (as per #paul) there are also WebSpark and, as of May 2010, the developer MAPS programmes.
Webspark information is here: http://www.microsoft.com/web/websitespark/default.aspx
Details of the Action Pack (MAPS) are currently here: https://partner.microsoft.com/global/40132997
I'm fairly certain that in all cases availablility varies by your location - but if you're producing stuff for/with/on Microsoft tools/platforms then they're all worth a look.
You're thinking of BizSpark:
http://www.microsoft.com/bizspark/
There is also the Empower program if you're an existing business, not a startup.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
This is more of a licencing issue than a code question. I really like the ckeditor editor and would like to use it in my freelance projects which I do for clients. However upon reading the license page it has me in a bit of a confusion. DO I have to buy licences if I intend to use this in cms websites that I build myself and hand over to clients?
If so then what are my alternate options which don't cost anything?
Its should be ok, if you don't change anything of its source, IMHO.
Integrating CKEditor in commercial
software, taking care of satisfying
the Open Source licenses terms, while
not able or interested on supporting
CKEditor and its development.
I am not a lawyer, but the dual licensing model would appear to not prevent you from using the open source licensed CKEditor in your cms / client projects, as long as the terms of the chosen license are met.
What you cannot do is sell, give away or otherwise distribute the editor to third parties without providing them with access to the source code and the license attached to the product.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
What are my obigations if used by commercial software ?
Is it GPLish or closer to ASL 2 ?
IANAL, but the FSF has stated that the CDDL is incompatible with the GPL. In terms of linking, it seems to have some features of the LGPL (linking from code with a different licence is allowed).
I'd read the legal text very carefully and check with your company's lawyer. Any changes you make to the code itself will have to be CDDL'd as well.
I came to this page via a person asking about the dual licensing of Sun (now Oracle) software under both GPL and CDDL. What this means is that you are free to use the software under the terms of one license or the other, or (as what most people seem to be doing) carry on the dual licensing for downstream users.