Appropriate License for Available-Source, No-Unauthorized-Distribution
I have a program (technically an addon to a program) whose code I want to be freely available for educational purposes or to create derivatives for personal use. However, I do NOT want to allow unregulated redistribution of either modified or unmodified code, whether for free or for profit.
However, I do want to allow the possibility of "pre-approved" derivative works - that is, the ability for a developer to request permission to distribute a derivative work (essentially an addon to an addon).
Finally, the licensing for the parent program (which I do not own) forbids selling my addon directly but does not forbid monetization via other means (such as adfly). I do not want to allow others to monetize my original code, but do want to allow them to monetize pre-approved derivative works.
Because of the rather nuanced nature of these requirements, and the fact it is NOT a free-distribution license like would be required for a "true" Open-Source license (as per the official definition), I do not know what license to use. Would creating my own be the best choice? Note that I do not have a lawyer nor do I have the resources to obtain one.
It appears on its face to be closest to a "visible source" license, but those do not seem to accommodate the "approved derivative work" aspect I want.
Here is the license as I have it so far. Is this a valid format and are these terms permitted to be used in this manner?
/*******************************************************************************
* @author Reika
*
* This code is the property of and owned and copyrighted by Reika.
*
* Any and all users are permitted to use the source for educational purposes, or to create derivative works
* for private use only.
*
* Unless given explicit written permission - electronic writing is acceptable - no user may redistribute this
* source code nor any derivative works. These pre-approved works must prominently contain this copyright notice.
*
* Additionally, no attempt may be made to achieve monetary gain from this code by anyone except the original author.
* In the case of pre-approved derivative works, any monetary gains made will be shared between the original author
* and the other developer(s), proportional to the ratio of derived to original code.
*
* Finally, any and all displays, duplicates or derivatives of this code must be prominently marked as such, and must contain
* attribution to the original author, including a link to the original source. Any attempts to claim credit for
* this code will be treated as intentional theft.
*
* Due to the Mojang and Minecraft Mod Terms of Service and Licensing Restrictions, compiled versions of this code
* must be provided for free. However, with the exception of pre-approved derivative works, only the original author
* may distribute compiled binary versions of this code.
*
* Failure to comply with these restrictions is a violation of copyright law and will be dealt with accordingly.
******************************************************************************/
I have a program (technically an addon to a program) whose code I want to be freely available for educational purposes or to create derivatives for personal use. However, I do NOT want to allow unregulated redistribution of either modified or unmodified code, whether for free or for profit.
However, I do want to allow the possibility of "pre-approved" derivative works - that is, the ability for a developer to request permission to distribute a derivative work (essentially an addon to an addon).
Finally, the licensing for the parent program (which I do not own) forbids selling my addon directly but does not forbid monetization via other means (such as adfly). I do not want to allow others to monetize my original code, but do want to allow them to monetize pre-approved derivative works.
Because of the rather nuanced nature of these requirements, and the fact it is NOT a free-distribution license like would be required for a "true" Open-Source license (as per the official definition), I do not know what license to use. Would creating my own be the best choice? Note that I do not have a lawyer nor do I have the resources to obtain one.
It appears on its face to be closest to a "visible source" license, but those do not seem to accommodate the "approved derivative work" aspect I want.
Here is the license as I have it so far. Is this a valid format and are these terms permitted to be used in this manner?
/*******************************************************************************
* @author Reika
*
* This code is the property of and owned and copyrighted by Reika.
*
* Any and all users are permitted to use the source for educational purposes, or to create derivative works
* for private use only.
*
* Unless given explicit written permission - electronic writing is acceptable - no user may redistribute this
* source code nor any derivative works. These pre-approved works must prominently contain this copyright notice.
*
* Additionally, no attempt may be made to achieve monetary gain from this code by anyone except the original author.
* In the case of pre-approved derivative works, any monetary gains made will be shared between the original author
* and the other developer(s), proportional to the ratio of derived to original code.
*
* Finally, any and all displays, duplicates or derivatives of this code must be prominently marked as such, and must contain
* attribution to the original author, including a link to the original source. Any attempts to claim credit for
* this code will be treated as intentional theft.
*
* Due to the Mojang and Minecraft Mod Terms of Service and Licensing Restrictions, compiled versions of this code
* must be provided for free. However, with the exception of pre-approved derivative works, only the original author
* may distribute compiled binary versions of this code.
*
* Failure to comply with these restrictions is a violation of copyright law and will be dealt with accordingly.
******************************************************************************/
No comments:
Post a Comment