[waseemsadiq]

Thanks thats helpfull, I'll add a licence tonight (probably BSD)

[joelthelion]

Note that BSD does allow "some dude in china [to] slap another name on it and sell it".

[elehack]

Yes, but they have to give credit back. Better than nothing - people can follow the trail.

[cbr]

I don't believe this is true. Looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses indicates nothing about an attribution requirement.

[Zev]

  * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

  * 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.

[bryanlarsen]

They just have to bury the license in the documentation somewhere. Who reads documentation?

[mrschwabe]

Yeah but at least if he goes BSD then he too can use this code in a commercial product.

[a3_nm]

Huh?! If he's the copyright holder, he can license the code under whatever license he chooses and use his code in a commercial product if he wishes.

[mrschwabe]

Ok I think I read you, but lets say his new commercial product was proprietary; the product costs $100. If the license for his original Inbox2 product was GPL, he would be required to distribute the source code on his new product right? So my point is, if its a BSD license he can integrate that code into the $100 product and not have to share the source code. I'm no software license expert so if I'm mistaken please correct me here.

[mst]

You might also find the Artistic License interesting -

http://www.perlfoundation.org/artistic_license_2_0

It's an interesting balance between freedom and giving back - may be more suited to what you want or may not.