3 ms·

I left this message as an issue: --- I may be mistaken, but it seems like you switched this from a "free" business to a "paid" business without letting people

by nanch 10y ago

I left this message as an issue: --- I may be mistaken, but it seems like you switched this from a "free" business to a "paid" business without letting people know what's going on. I understand that you want to get paid and I'd be happy to purchase a license from you for fmt.phar, but you don't have any public pricing available and you've surprised me with this "upgrade". Could you let us know what you're planning, why you're planning it, and provide some insight into what your thinking is? As of now I'm forking and reverting to a previous version. I hope you can provide some guidance because I'd like to support you and I enjoy using phpfmt. Thank you. --- He responded: > Be sure to buy a license when you do it. and locked and closed the issue. reference: http://imgur.com/wpZ5Apv http://imgur.com/wpZ5Apv

ramtatatam 10y ago
What was the original license? I'm guessing if the license was permissive then whatever was available under such license can be forked and made available to the community at no further cost? P.s. I do understand the author spent time developing this but if thing was made available under permissive license and community grown around it then it is extremely not professional and not fair to change terms in such way.
- nanch 10y ago
  From php.phar: # Copyright (c) 2015, phpfmt and its authors # All rights reserved. # Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: # 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. # 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. # 3. Neither the name of the copyright holder nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
  - ramtatatam 10y ago
    I'm not a lawyer but it looks like permission is required only if you wanted to "endorse or promote products derived from this software" Apart from that you should be fine as long as you include this short license text in next releases.
  - onli 10y ago
    That looks like a BSD 3-clause licence to me, https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause. The talk of DMCA takedowns is concerning and could mean that the original author is not aware that he can't revert the licence. I hope he just talks about accidental copies of a newer version. But even then…

by nanch 10y ago

ramtatatam 10y ago

What was the original license? I'm guessing if the license was permissive then whatever was available under such license can be forked and made available to the community at no further cost? P.s. I do understand the author spent time developing this but if thing was made available under permissive license and community grown around it then it is extremely not professional and not fair to change terms in such way.

nanch 10y ago
From php.phar: # Copyright (c) 2015, phpfmt and its authors # All rights reserved. # Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: # 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. # 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. # 3. Neither the name of the copyright holder nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
- ramtatatam 10y ago
  I'm not a lawyer but it looks like permission is required only if you wanted to "endorse or promote products derived from this software" Apart from that you should be fine as long as you include this short license text in next releases.
- onli 10y ago
  That looks like a BSD 3-clause licence to me, https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause. The talk of DMCA takedowns is concerning and could mean that the original author is not aware that he can't revert the licence. I hope he just talks about accidental copies of a newer version. But even then…