License for BSplayer...

[ploum]

Hi,

I think BSplayer is a wonderful software, perhaps the best video player under windows. It's perhaps one of the only not "free software" I use.

I see on this forum that someone asked about the license, but there's no real answer.

BSplayer can become the best software ever seen if your publish it under a free-software license and you publish the source. I suggest personnaly the General Public License.

Why ?

- BSplayer will become more and more popular (think about those FreeSoftware CD-rom).
- Some hackers will bring you a lot of good ideas.
- With GPL, you can be sure that, if someone modify your software, those modifications must be under GPL and you can access it.
- With GPL, your author copyright will be in a safe place.

Imagine : now, a society can take bsplayer and "decompil" it. They can then send it, for a lot of money and attack you because you stole code ! ! ! (Ok, it's paranoia... but it's possible )
With GPL or another Free Licence, you will be in a safe an really useful position. Be aware that GPL allow you to give your software for money if you want.

Feel free to contact me if you have any questions about free licence...

[ploum]

I'm not the only one who care about open source ;)

http://forum.bsplayer.org/viewtopic....2b1acc8f0ec37f
http://forum.bsplayer.org/viewtopic....cffa4f40f2f6ee

[silver]

Originally Posted by ploum

Hi,

I think BSplayer is a wonderful software, perhaps the best video player under windows. It's perhaps one of the only not "free software" I use.

I see on this forum that someone asked about the license, but there's no real answer.

BSplayer can become the best software ever seen if your publish it under a free-software license and you publish the source. I suggest personnaly the General Public License.

Why ?

- BSplayer will become more and more popular (think about those FreeSoftware CD-rom).
- Some hackers will bring you a lot of good ideas.
- With GPL, you can be sure that, if someone modify your software, those modifications must be under GPL and you can access it.
- With GPL, your author copyright will be in a safe place.

Imagine : now, a society can take bsplayer and "decompil" it. They can then send it, for a lot of money and attack you because you stole code ! ! ! (Ok, it's paranoia... but it's possible )
With GPL or another Free Licence, you will be in a safe an really useful position. Be aware that GPL allow you to give your software for money if you want.

Feel free to contact me if you have any questions about free licence...

I think that the author should think twice before adopting the GPL license. Under the license terms, you must release the source code of your work.

Even if you don't mind, imagine the situation below: I am a computer magazine editor. And I have seen your code and program, I include it in the magazine and it CD-Rom. And use bsplayer as advertisement to increase the sale of magazine.

If the author only want the computer magazine editor to copy and show the code of bsplayer to his co-worker and friends, but restrict his right to print the code on the computer magazine. I think that Aladdin Free Public License http://www.ghostscript.com/doc/cvs/Public.htm or creative common license http://creativecommons.org/license/ are much more suitable the author.

The main difference from the two licenses are Aladdin Free Public License require the author to release the source code while creative commons license can use it in the program itself or source code or both

[silver]

I do recommend the author to have a license agreement for bsplayer. But I really don't recommend GPL esp when the author don't want to release the source or restrict commerical right of use.

Don't just use a license agreement just because it is a famous one. The author should read carefully all the terms and conditions in a license agreement before you adopt it in your software

How about write a license agreement yourself?? Unless the author knows the technical issue involved in license agreement, I don't recommend such act. Many license agreements written by beginners are full of error.

The author should know that license agreement is used to protect your product. It should be written by experienced professionals.

[bonehead]

remember cdex, which has been shamelessly leaked, graphically modificated (just a little) and re-released under another name with spywares.

[ploum]

:!: this post is only my humble opinion ! I don't want to start a flamewar or anything. I respect people with others opinion too... (I write this warning after reading the text I just wrote ;) )

Originally Posted by bonehead

remember cdex, which has been shamelessly leaked, graphically modificated (just a little) and re-released under another name with spywares.

Yes ! See the Linux kernel :D GPL is too bad !

I don't know cdex, but if you distribute some code under the GPL, other people must also redistribute it under the GPL. And I don't know any spywares released under the GPL.

Media Player Classic and VideoLanClient are both under the GPL. Don't forget mplayer (my actual player), xine or the future gstreamer are also under the GPL.

I think it's very important to allow people to modify and to redistribute your code. Yes, CD magazine can make money.. But where's the problem ? It's a lot of publicity for you (your name has to be on the software) and when a big guy will need a hacker, he will say : "hmm.. This software is just what I need. I will give a few thousand of € to the developper, asking him to adapt the software to my company".

But.. that's only a matter of choice.

The most important thing about a free license is that, if the developper stop the software (for any reason), other people can still develop it. I don't know how many people are in the bsplayer team. But if they want to get a real life without a computer, if they have a great full-time job or/and a full time cpuple of kids with ;), they will stop the software. And BSplayer will be dead... All the work will be forgeted (is it the right word ? my english is so bad !)

But that's only my opinion, and I always respect the choice of the author. I only suggest to publish the license of bsplayer.