I am a VB.Net programmer and I have created a few programs that are available for download, I was wondering about licensing my software.
I want to know what license is best for me and how much it will cost(Hopefully nothing)
I want my software to be free for download but users must be unable to change and alter to software legally!
I also don't want to be liable for any damage caused by the program if that were to ever happen.
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
use the Gnu Gpl would be my best bet. but you can Just use a EULA which restricts users from modifying the app but still be free
-----------------------------
"I don't fear Computers. I fear the lack of them" Isaac Asimov
My Personal Blog in the making at a new address thibeaz.com
your friendly neighbourhood moderator Zach Thibeau
I need to know how to go about getting my software licensed like?
Does it cost?
Do I need to apply for it or can I just use it?
I have searched Google a little but I got sick of that so now I'm going back to the fun bit of being a application developer, The programming!
Luke Franklin
www.LukeFranklin.com
Signature automatically removed for containing links
You can make the EULA your self I believe. But to promote things here they hafta be released under a OSI Approved License like GPL or MIT. Chose GBPL if you don't want peeps stealing your work like M$ or other corporations, but still want it 2 be Opensource. MIT if you want it to be Opensource to everyone, including corporations but at the risk of being made proprietary.
--
As all of ya should know Micro$oft is the Evil Empire, and Windows (a.k.a. Winblows or Windoze) is their greatest general, so please make a difference and install Linux or FreeBSD on yer Windows comp.
why lock down the source? I'd go GPL personally, but if you want to keep the source private, some sort of freeware license would have to be used. Just about any license out there includes a clause about damage.
_________________________
I don't believe in signatures
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
I think you should use the GPL. It's OpenSource, but it makes it so that anyone who uses the code must make their modification GPL too. GPL is best for most software.
----
"Pray as if everything depended upon God and work as if everything depended upon man."
Francis Cardinal Spell
-Please search before posting.
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." - Rick Cook
I give In...
I'll use GPL but you will have to tell me what to do to get it?
Luke Franklin
www.LukeFranklin.com
Signature automatically removed for containing links
Read Wikipedia about it. The easy way to license is to save the license.txt into your project and add a header to each of your files. (Header as in a comment, not a header file)
----
Ryan McCue.
Blog.
So all that Airbus-delay trouble over here in Europe is because of YOU!
Simeon.
"If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate."
said.
--
As all of ya should know Micro$oft is the Evil Empire, and Windows (a.k.a. Winblows or Windoze) is their greatest general, so please make a difference and install Linux or FreeBSD on yer Windows comp.
But what about the copyright! I'd like to know how get my software copyrighted and their names too! I'm unsure how it all works!
Luke Franklin
www.LukeFranklin.com
Signature automatically removed for containing links
whether it is a video game guide or software is protected under copyright law. But I believe to have something TMed u need 2 pay someone. EULAs suck IMO. Just use GPL, since theres gonna be a FS revolution sooner or later. Besides FSLs make it easier 4 your software to become better.
--
As all of ya should know Micro$oft is the Evil Empire, and Windows (a.k.a. Winblows or Windoze) is their greatest general, so please make a difference and install Linux or FreeBSD on yer Windows comp.
Thanks for all your help guys!
I have written a EULA (Sorry GPL fans) - I'm kinda a Microsoft fan, I like to protect my work.
My programs are automatically protected under Australian copyright laws.
Luke Franklin
www.LukeFranklin.com
Signature automatically removed for containing links
Does protect it.
_______________________________________________
Wow, I just noticed I still had a signature, that's enough of that.
The GPL would protect it. Others would be able to use your code, but they must ALL credit you in their work, and keep their work open source as well.
_________________________
I don't believe in signatures
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
This will provide all the protection you could want. It was written and vetted by many lawyers that understand IP issues.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
For that matter, I surely would like to see the PortableApps.com software upgrade to the version 3 of the GPL.
-IP
it probably aint going to happen any time soon on Toucan because as far as I am aware you cannot mix GPL 2 & 3 code, and the images are GPL 2.
___
Author of Toucan
'...and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard...' JFK
They're not part of the compiled binary, right?
_______________________________________________
Wow, I just noticed I still had a signature, that's enough of that.
yet, but they are in 2.0
___
Author of Toucan
'...and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard...' JFK
Well I see.
_______________________________________________
Wow, I just noticed I still had a signature, that's enough of that.
I'm sure I saw a "Licensed under version 2.0 or any later version" or similar somewhere in the text of the GPL.
Edit: Oops withdraw that, it is at the author's discretion and the icons are specified only as GPL 2.
For example, take a look at the TrueCrypt "license.txt" file. TrueCrypt has what is called a "collective" license that includes the licensing terms of each of the component pieces:
"The TrueCrypt Collective License consists of several distinct licenses, which are contained in this document (separated by lines consisting of underscores) and which are, in this section, referred to as component licenses. Each of the component licenses applies only to (portions of) the source code file(s) in which the component license is contained or in which it is explicitly referenced, and to compiled or otherwise processed forms of such source code. None of the component licenses applies to this product as a whole, even when it uses the phrase "this product" or any other equivalent term/phrase. Unless otherwise stated, graphics and files that are not part of the source code are covered solely by the TrueCrypt License.
Note: The TrueCrypt License is one of the component licenses of which the TrueCrypt Collective License consists."
-IP
A ZDNet series of articles on GPL debunks several myths:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Burnette/?p=331
-IP