|
|
|
|
|
by davidroetzel
4152 days ago
|
|
One problem with dual-licensing though is that open source contribution becomes unnecessarily hard. Every contributor will have to sign a Contributor License Agreement, that at the very least allows you to dual-license their code. Many CLAs even have the contributor sign over her copyright to you. Not everyone will be happy to sign something like that. And integrating a pull request on github suddenly becomes a tedious excercise in international copyright law :) So dual-licensing gives you all the publicity-related and try-before-you-buy advantages of open source. But you will probably miss out on other great aspects, especially community-wise. |
|
And the right to fork a project also means the right to put conditions on accepting contributions.
And there are more advantages than publicity and free demo, namely that users have freedom to run the app themselves, find another service provider, find another project maintainer, etc. I'd see it as a far less risky situation than anything proprietary. Compared to Apache/BSD/MIT it's less risky in the sense that people aren't going to be introducing proprietary forks.