7

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. Consult your copyright attorney if you want clarification on any of these issues. uses a statically linked class licensed under "GNU GPL v2 or any later" (modified by adding a few properties (just getters, a couple of lines)) The GPL requires that you re-release the source code for any changes you've made ...


5

There are several business models for Free Software (which I feel is a more interesting terminology thant Open Source), and you should also look into the FSF site and its what is free software page. Notice also that even proprietary software is often non-profitable thru licensing. It is rumored that the development costs of SAP software is not paid by the ...


4

You are out of luck. The GPL license is written in such a way that if even the tiniest part of your code was provided to you under the GPL license, then you are required to use the GPL license as well when distributing your code. Content posted on Stack Overflow is licensed under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license (as stated in the Terms of Service). Unfortunately, ...


3

You assume that the recipient wants to give away your software. It's possible that your customer has a vested business interest in not sharing the software. For example, if you sell an open-source industry-specific application to a business, that business might want to keep that application out of the hands of competitors in the same industry. (Of course, ...


2

The other answers have already shown you how to make money off software without making money directly off the sale, however, there is still one reason why someone would straight up buy your software: some people or organizations like to have someone to sue, and it is easier to sue someone you have given money to (and thus have a contract of sale with) than ...


2

Modifying open source software. Sometimes people need open source software to do something it doesn't already do and no one is willing to do that for free. So a company might pay someone to do it for them. For instance, a company might want to release some hardware running linux. But their hardware requires new drivers. So they pay someone (or maybe ...


2

When you sell something -- anything -- you are trading something of value (the product, services or experience) for something of value (money). When you sell open source software, what you are typically selling isn't the software, but rather the services and experience that you've bundled with the software. For example, you may have made an installer that ...


2

Looks like you're not the only one who's ever had this problem. This may be helpful: ... You can copy all of gameplay without any issues at all. That is not copyrightable or enforceable. The things that matter are assets - art, sound, music, video, etc. For example if you take ZX game and clone it with your own assets you will be perfectly fine ...


1

uses a statically linked class licensed under "GNU GPL v2 or any later" (modified by adding a few properties (just getters, a couple of lines)) By using a GPL licensed class/library your code must also be published under the GPL license. See also: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10130143/gpl-lgpl-and-static-linking#10179181 A note on your 2.: In my ...


1

Here's another perspective that I did not see in any of the given answers already. Do you drive a car? I think most people in this country do, and yet the vast majority don't get paid for driving. In fact, they pay quite a bit for it: the car, the fuel, the repairs, the insurance, the registration, and so on. Everything you said about writing software ...


1

Note: This is more of a law question than a programming question. Consult a lawyer of your country if you need to be 100% certain. On your questions: Am I allowed to disassemble the program to study it? No. You are not allowed to disassemble or reverse engineer for that purpose. Does the copyright apply to the code (implementation), the behavior, or ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible