5 ms·
If you release something under MIT, you _can't_ actually constrain commercial use.
by marijn 11y ago
If you release something under MIT, you _can't_ actually constrain commercial use.
- jasonkester 11y agoAmazing. I didn't know that. The lengths software people will go to avoid getting compensated for their work, eh? So yeah, scratch the above then. You'll have to dual license with a modified license for non-commercial use. Same idea, slightly different execution (but still no need to go to GPL extremes if you don't want to).
- marijn 11y agoAny non-commercial license will have to have implications similar to the GPL, and thus scare off most users, prevent projects from wanting to incur this as a dependency, and so on. It is one way to go, but will seriously limit reach. Also, as I said, it'll require contributors to sign over their rights.
- pbhjpbhj 11y agoFor reference http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT. The GP said "asking" commercial customers to pay, which you can. You're right too, you can't constrain commercial use but that doesn't mean you _can't_ sell something that you MIT license it just means that people have the option to try and acquire your MIT licensed software from one of your licensees (or their sub-licensees, etc.) instead.