We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.
16

Three obvious reasons: There's no open source equivalent, The company wants paid-for support that they can rely on. They are a bit behind the times and do not yet trust open source libraries.


16

Your friend is wrong. First, the GPL only requires to disclose your source code to your customers when your software runs on their machines. Your load balancer runs on your own hardware, so you don't need to provide the sourcecode to anyone who connects to it. There is a variant of the GPL which requires to disclose the sourcecode to everyone who "interacts ...


15

There are two answers here, because there are two principal ways to look at this. First, sometimes free software thrives in competition with proprietary software because it wasn't designed to make money in the first place. That's not the only thing that motivates people, after all. But if you're looking for a way to monetize free software, you're ...


12

Well you can "obfuscate" the code by removing all recognizable names that are not essential to the working of the code. (And minification is a good approximation to obfuscation.) However, the fact remains that Javascript must be delivered (to the user's browser) as source code that is ultimately compilable and executable by the browser. That means that ...


11

The fact that you are dealing with a custom scripting language is irrelevant. You are migrating a set of scripts from one language to another. There are 2 basic strategies: 1) Take an on large effort to convert all the scripts upfront (as a project) 2) As you need to make changes to particular scripts, rewrite them in the new language. After some time, ...


9

I would create 2 projects. OSS Project which can run standalone. Proprietary code which depends on the OSS project code. You can have the dependency be a build time or run time dependency. If you want each package to be standalone, then you can have proprietary package pull in the OSS files it needs during build/package creation. If your fine with a run ...


8

The open source business model is not much about selling lots of copies to many individual customers. This model would not be sustainable, because each of your customers could compete with you and underbid you. But there are other business models which allow you to make money from open source software: Support and consulting fees: Your software may be free,...


5

I had such an experience. My approach was to reverse-engineer the language implementation, deriving a more or less formal specification for its syntax and semantics (imagine deconstructing a BNF out of a handwritten parser in Fortran77, with several thousands of keywords). Then I've implemented a compiler for this language, translating it into an ...


5

Another approach would be to port your scripting run time to the new scripting language of choice and provide ways for executing legacy scripts within the new language. LegacyRuntime.execute(String script); Being able to mix old and new code should ease the transition.


5

Nothing prevents anybody from forking your software and becoming a competitor. If you use a copyleft-type license, their fork cannot ever become non-free software (if that's what you mean by proprietary). Things are different with permissive open source license, like BSD-style licenses. If there are other Free alternatives, the only way to monetize on your ...


4

Assuming that everything is legal and above board, and that we are talking about a product that has a kosher open source license before the process starts: How does the transition happen ... Basically, the company makes a new release of the software with the non-open source license. and what can be done to prevent it beyond choosing a difference ...


4

First of: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, consult a real lawyer before proceeding. That would depend on the license of the third-party code. Also, you will have to choose a license that allows linking to a proprietary libs. Consult the company from which you got the library - and a lawyer. You can release your code under as many different ...


4

Ethical? Maybe, ethics are a personal decision. Legal? Possibly, depending on your contract with the company. Smart? Heck no, when future employers see you as their competitor, your resume will go in the trash can.


3

I honestly think you need to give up on not distributing code in your case. Closed source does not mean you don't/can't distribute code, it means that they are not allowed to distribute it. I think you should really evaluate your goals. If you want to stop people from looking at your code, then use an obfuscateor, if you want to bill per install then use a ...


3

This question is handled in the GNU GPL FAQ: Can I use GPL-covered editors such as GNU Emacs to develop non-free programs? Can I use GPL-covered tools such as GCC to compile them? Yes, because the copyright on the editors and tools does not cover the code you write. Using them does not place any restrictions, legally, on the license you use for your ...


3

No, there are none that are particularly well regarded, mostly because there aren't very many at all. Companies that don't free their products are usually VERY wary of letting ANYONE see the source under any circumstances. When they do, they usually want a pile of legal paperwork. I do have to ask what you hope to accomplish by using such a license. I can ...


3

You seem to misunderstand a key part: the unreal engine remains a commercial engine. This means that they will still get the licensing fees from every developer and each game sold. The EULA even specifically states that you can't share the source with anyone that isn't also a licensee. The major benefit is that there are now programmers that are paying you ...


2

The GNU General Public License was created explicitly to prevent proprietary forks - it allows you to distribute derived works (forks or add-ons) only if you agree to put them under the same license. The GPL grants the recipients of a computer program the rights of the Free Software Definition and uses copyleft to ensure the freedoms are preserved ...


2

As far as the large majority of open-source licenses is concerned, there is no difference at all between software written in a compiled language (thus providing the ability to distribute object/binary code) and software written in an interpreted language (thus effectively requiring distribution in source form). This also holds for the interaction of these ...


2

If you take up actual code and some critical design which is already developed in your paid project - copying that and giving in Open Source - that is Un-ethical and Illegal. Even if your code is fresh - if yo are taking away any Intellectual property it is Un-ethical and illegal. If you use time or other resources of the company for what you are paid to ...


2

IANAL, this is not legal advise. If you want to be sure, talk to a lawyer. If you are offering a web-service that appears to be a single product, then it is likely that your users will treat it as such, regardless of how it is technically realized. This means that if a sufficiently interested user tries to download the source of the site (to exercise his ...


1

I am not a lawyer. You should get one, if you are concerned about possible legal issues. If your “tool is not producing or generating any of the output” there is absolutely no reason to worry about possible extending of GNU GPL’s copyleft to user’s data. Even if it would do, that would not be a great problem, you would just have to take certain precautions,...


1

Are you "copying" the part of the program or all of it? Is your program/app when compiled have any resemblance on the original? Is it a GUI or just plain library code? I think you can easily get around when you're just using part of it, and if your app does not resemble or function the same way as with the original. Licenses varies so you better try to ...


1

Source Control & Branching The root would be the code common to the both distributions. You would also (presumably) create two branches from your root: Open Source Closed Source Open Source would probably mirror your root in this scenario. On a regular basis, you would merge Open Source and Closed Source by hand (Closed Source would likely not get as ...


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