20 replies to this topic

[Grakkam]

Hi all!

I'm trying to wrap my head around the free software concept, and I feel I need some help. I've searched this forum and have found a few topics helpful, but they are quite old and on some places there are conflicting statements. Please help me understand what I am allowed to charge money for when it comes to osCommerce. I mean, I would certainly like to contribute, but I would also like to pay my bills.

I understand no-one can prevent me for selling my time, but what about actual files? Provided that I leave all relevant copyright notices in place, am I allowed to....

1: ...sell an add-on I've written?
--- Let's say I've created a bunch of add-ons that I've released to the community, but that this particular one took a lot of work, has a very specialized purpose, and I would really like to try to sell it. Is it correct that I am allowed to do this, without publishing it for free download, provided the paying customer recieves unobfuscated code?

2: ...sell a complete working osCommerce package?
--- Let's say I've heavily modified the software to suit the needs of a specific client. For instance, maybe I've created a very specialized B2B solution. Can I sell the software package to the client? Even under a different name, provided the info about it being based on osCommerce is still there?

3: ...sell language files?
--- Let's say certain language files are either not available for free download, or the ones that are available contain bad translations. Or maybe a client has special requests for certain terminology. Can I modify an existing set of language files and sell the result?

Now, finally, would any of the above questions have different answers under the GPL and the BSD licences respectively?

I appreciate any and all insights provided.

[burt]

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes

You can even simply download osCommerce, and sell that for a million dollars if you want to (whether you would find a buyer is another matter). It is the freedom that the licensing gives you.

[Grakkam]

burt, on 04 May 2011, 12:22, said:

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes

You can even simply download osCommerce, and sell that for a million dollars if you want to (whether you would find a buyer is another matter). It is the freedom that the licensing gives you.

Thanks! That's what I thought, so brownie points for me for getting it right. And +3 Karma to you for replying so quickly!

So, let's see if I understand the rest of it too...

4: If I do sell some code based on osCommerce, I can not claim any type of exclusivity, can I? Because it must be distributed under the same license as it came with originally, right? So if I sell you a piece of code, then you can sell, or give, it to someone else under the same license?

5: No-one just has a right to demand to get the code gratis, right? If I'm selling this piece of software, you can't email me and demand I send it to you for free, just because it's under the GPL/BSD, right?

6: But as per question #4, if you pay me for the software, I have no say on what you do with it afterwards? You can do the same thing I did, use it, sell it, modify it, etc?

7: If the above is correct, I do still have the option of adding my own name to the copyright notice for the bits of code I've written, and you must include that bit too, right?

So, these licenses work sort of like the Creative Commons - Attribution-ShareAlike license?

[DunWeb]

Stig,


I sell custom carts based on the osCommerce framework. I resell the cart under the original license PLUS a site license that allows the client the use of the software on their domain it was installed on. It does not allow them to clone the software or remove my tags. Depending on the site, it may have a variety of custom coded features / contributions in it that were written by me and belong exclusively to me, hence the site license restrictions.

SO FAR, I have not had a problem providing my services in this manner although I will soon seek legal action against a developer for violating the site license. Guess I will see what happens.




Chris

[burt]

4. Correct
5. Correct
6. Correct
7. Any code you write from scratch, is YOUR copyright. If it is based on existing osCommerce code, then you should retain the copyright of osCommerce and add your own. Examples;

a. You write a new "order editor" from the ground up which works with osCommerce, but does not interact with any native osCommerce functions. That is YOUR copyright, it does not need to say "Copyright osCommerce" anywhere at all.
b. You make a few changes to one of the existing osCommerce pages (eg, the categories page in the admin area). You can ADD TO the existing copyright. Eg: "Copyright osCommerce & XYZ Co."

Basically the GPL license gives you the freedom to do with osCommerce pretty much whatever you want, so long as you pass on that freedom to your downline.

[Grakkam]

Thanks guys! (Have some extra karma!)

So, just be sure I understand correctly...

8: If I modify any files that are released under the GPL, I must do the same. But any new files with original code written from scratch that I add, I can release under any license I want to?

[kymation]

8. Correct, provided that your new code does not interact with the existing osCommerce code in any way. That means that a file that uses one function from osCommerce, or any significant amount of code from a function, must be released under the GPL.

This is where Chris will come to grief. The GPL does not allow you to add any additional restrictions, and that includes a "site license." Once you release code that is under the GPL, it's out of your control.

No, I'm not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice, yadda yadda yadda.

Regards
Jim

[DunWeb]

Hi Jim,

Perhaps I didn't explain clearly enough. The example I gave above was that in addition to the GPL license of osCommerce I also had a 'site license' that covered the custom coded pages that were created to perform a specific function within osCommerce. I don't believe the GPL would encompass my proprietary code just because it functions within the structure of osCommerce. I guess I will find out soon enough.





Chris

[kymation]

It depends on how much your code is related to the stock osC code. If everything you have written is completely separate from any osC code, you may then be in the clear. So long as you didn't include any osC code in your files, those files may be OK. There is a possibility that files that are too closely tied to the osCommerce structure may still be a problem even if they contain no osC code. There will also be a problem if you have included modified osC files in the package. That alone could make the whole package subject to the GPL. If the changes were sufficiently trivial, or if they were only minimal changes needed for compatibility, you might get by. It then becomes a judgment call as to how significant the interaction is between the GPL'd files and your new files.

Regards
Jim

[Grakkam]

kymation, on 04 May 2011, 23:27, said:

8. Correct, provided that your new code does not interact with the existing osCommerce code in any way. That means that a file that uses one function from osCommerce, or any significant amount of code from a function, must be released under the GPL.

Really? If my new script contains code copied or derived from existing code in the package, then sure. But simply for making function calls? Surely, software does not become GPL'ed simply for interacting with GPL software? (http://blogs.sitepoint.com/public-license-explained/)

[Grakkam]

Grakkam, on 05 May 2011, 09:13, said:

Really? If my new script contains code copied or derived from existing code in the package, then sure. But simply for making function calls? Surely, software does not become GPL'ed simply for interacting with GPL software? (http://blogs.sitepoint.com/public-license-explained/)

I just found this, though: http://www.majordojo.com/2010/07/the-gpl-what-it-means-and-what-is-means-for-plugins.php

The quote from the FSF looks relevant in this case. Or?

[kymation]

There is some question over how closely tied the two have to be to be considered a derivative work. One of the tests is: Does your code depend on osCommerce to operate? Clearly it does if you are using function calls. That's only one point, not the whole debate. You could argue that you are only using an API to osC and your code is independent. That is actually reasonable. You could also argue that the function calls are trivial, since the use of only minor parts of the osC code is not protected.

Another factor is whether you have modified any of the osC code. If your code depends on such modified code, it's probably derivative, depending on how much you modified. If you just provide a new stylesheet and images, for example, then you could be considered to just be using an API that is required to interoperate with osC. Your images would never fall under the GPL, and your stylesheet would probably not, depending on how different it is.

If you package your code with a full copy of osC, as many templates do, it is more likely to be considered derivative than if you supply only your new files.

If you have any doubts about any of this, don't go looking at blogs and private websites. Go straight to the FSF and read their FAQ.

In the end, a clever lawyer can make a case for one or the other where the law is unclear. The FSF has some of the best lawyers in the country, so you're likely on the wrong side of that one.

Regards
Jim

[Grakkam]

kymation, on 05 May 2011, 16:14, said:

If you have any doubts about any of this, don't go looking at blogs and private websites. Go straight to the FSF and read their FAQ.

In the end, a clever lawyer can make a case for one or the other where the law is unclear. The FSF has some of the best lawyers in the country, so you're likely on the wrong side of that one.

Regards
Jim

I don't think I'll ever do something osC related that I wouldn't want to release under the GPL. I just want to try to understand the subject as well as I can before I jump in head first.

Thanks Jim, Chris and G, for answering my questions!

[cannuck1964]

DunWeb, on 04 May 2011, 14:30, said:

Stig,


I sell custom carts based on the osCommerce framework. I resell the cart under the original license PLUS a site license that allows the client the use of the software on their domain it was installed on. It does not allow them to clone the software or remove my tags. Depending on the site, it may have a variety of custom coded features / contributions in it that were written by me and belong exclusively to me, hence the site license restrictions.

SO FAR, I have not had a problem providing my services in this manner although I will soon seek legal action against a developer for violating the site license. Guess I will see what happens.

Chris

In actual fact, your site licence is in contravention to the GPL and really there is nothing you could do if they wanted to distribute any custom software.

Any graphics can be copyrighted, as they are artistic, but the cart system itself you can not force the end user to do anything after you have released the code to them.

And I think as a worker in the industry and long time member here you would both know this and also look to support the openness of code sharing.

cheers

Edited by cannuck1964, 30 June 2011, 12:03.

[cannuck1964]

Grakkam, on 05 May 2011, 09:13, said:

Really? If my new script contains code copied or derived from existing code in the package, then sure. But simply for making function calls? Surely, software does not become GPL'ed simply for interacting with GPL software? (http://blogs.sitepoi...ense-explained/)

If you are using GPL code, function calls etc. Then the entire work is considered derived and hence will be subject to the GPL.

cheers

[cannuck1964]

DunWeb, on 05 May 2011, 02:12, said:

Hi Jim,

Perhaps I didn't explain clearly enough. The example I gave above was that in addition to the GPL license of osCommerce I also had a 'site license' that covered the custom coded pages that were created to perform a specific function within osCommerce. I don't believe the GPL would encompass my proprietary code just because it functions within the structure of osCommerce. I guess I will find out soon enough.


Chris

If you package these changed files with the osC package, then you have to maintain the same GPL license.

You can create your own scripts and sell them under different licensing, but you can not use any of the GPL code or derivatives of it (ie you can not take a function, recode it to do the same thing and call it yours) and you can not release these changed (licensed differently) files in the same GPL package, if you do release them like that, you will lose any control as they do revert to the GPL.

I think you are going to get an expensive lesson from lawyer costs as the FSF will also fight to protect this arrangement in Canada.

cheers

[Mark Evans]

I have just come across this thread and thought I should clarify.

You are allowed to sell copies of code based on osCommerce whether that be complete sites or add ons which integrate with osCommerce code, but only under the terms of the GNU GPL. Thus you must make the source code available to the users and they must be allowed to redistribute and modify it as described in the GPL.

They are of course not required to re-distribute or do anything with the code if they don't want to, but if they did want to they are within their rights to upload the complete site and give it away for free (or even charge if they want).

If anyone is placing any restrictions on any code which integrates into osCommerce then please report them to a team member and we will look into any potential issues in regards to GPL licence violations.

[GemRock]

Quote

...placing any restrictions...

examples of restrictions, please?
Ken

[DunWeb]

Mark Evans, on 24 September 2011, 15:41, said:

I have just come across this thread and thought I should clarify.

You are allowed to sell copies of code based on osCommerce whether that be complete sites or add ons which integrate with osCommerce code, but only under the terms of the GNU GPL. Thus you must make the source code available to the users and they must be allowed to redistribute and modify it as described in the GPL.

They are of course not required to re-distribute or do anything with the code if they don't want to, but if they did want to they are within their rights to upload the complete site and give it away for free (or even charge if they want).

If anyone is placing any restrictions on any code which integrates into osCommerce then please report them to a team member and we will look into any potential issues in regards to GPL licence violations.

Mark,

I understand how osCommerce is distributed under GPL, but what if someone purchases an add on that is not licensed under GPL and understands that by integrating it into osCommerce that they cannot re-distribute it or re-sell it as part of the license for that add on ? By installing the add on, the user agrees to those terms ? Would that be a violation of the GPL if the end user agrees ?

Chris

[Mark Evans]

GemRock, on 24 September 2011, 16:27, said:

examples of restrictions, please?

You cannot restrict what a user can do with GPL code, for example you cannot prevent them from redistributing code, whether for free or for a fee. They have all the rights of the GPL licence.