License Agreements

[TJP1687]

I'm looking for a license agreement that says the program is free (not the source code) and I'm not resposible for anything.

Thanx for any help in advance,
TJP1687

[John E]

Here's a phrase that I put at the top of the "readme" file for all my applications. I'll come clean and admit that I didn't think up the wording myself....

This software is provided "AS IS" and without warranty of any kind whether express, implied or otherwise, including, without limitation, any warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. Under no circumstances shall [INSERT YOUR OWN NAME HERE] be liable for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, consequential or other damages of any kind, or any damages whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this software including, without limitation, damages reulting from loss of use, data or profits howsoever caused and whether or not advised of the possibility of such loss or damage, regrdless of the theory of liability.

You need to bear in mind though that if you sell the software for profit, you cannot override any local laws or trading standards etc - no matter what wording is used.

[Andreas Masur]

[Moved thread]

[Sam Hobbs]

Look around in http://sourceforge.net and http://www.gnu.org; there should be ample samples in the software in those sites.

[kasracer]

I believe you can distribute it under the GPL without requiring you to release the source code.

[Sam Hobbs]

However the GPL has restrictions that (it is my understanding that) TJP1687 does not want. Also, are you sure the GPL allows distribution without source code? One of us should look at it, but I am 99% sure it does not.

[kasracer]

After looking at it, it appears you're right. Though I thought someone told me there was a part of the GPL that allowed distribution of free software without the source.

[Sam Hobbs]

I think the GPL is clear that if we want to distribute software without the source, it must be done as a separate package in a manner that it is clear it is separate. Perhaps the confusion results from that.

[sleeping]

Or isn't that the Lesser GPL (LGPL) that allows you to release binary without source?

[Sam Hobbs]

Which software would the Lesser GPL need to apply to? Our software or the other software?

[TJP1687]

First I'd like to thank Sam, I went to his site for help on this program before and it was a big help, thank you very much. Second I'd like thank those of you who replied. I looked at both the GPL and the LGPL before posting and neither seem to fit what I'm looking for. I'm still thinking about selling it because I've gotten some pretty good reviews on it. But a friend of mine (whom I made it for) wants me to make it freeware cuz he has friends who are looking for the same type of program. Anyways thanx.


TJP1687

EDIT: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php
What do you you all think about this one?

[Sam Hobbs]

If you choose to not provide the source code, then you still have the option of including the source code later. However if (when) you provide the source code, you provide the ability to others to improve it. Technically speaking, you should be able to retain control of the source code if you choose to. One advantage of providing the current version free, with or without source code, is that you benefit from testing and other use of the software by many. Later, you can make improvements and you might want to sell an enhanced version.

As for the MIT License, it is probably good enough if it satisfies your requirements and I assume it does. Since it is in the Open Source web site I assume it applies to software that includes source code. However it seems to be useful regardlous of whether the source code is included.

[Deniz]

Just type into Word or a similar word processing program:


This software isn't meant to work. It's not even meant to be seen by anyone. It might even break your computer down or spread misery to you and those around you. For such reasons, do not install this program, ever.

If you do install it, as silly as it would be, don't expect it to work. If it does, that would be very unusual and you could consider yourself very very lucky.

Either way it is a good idea not to give this program to anyone because I might one day turn around and track who has the software unregistered and sue them. Consider this your official warning.


And then either run thesaurus on each noun and verb or get a witty lawyer to write this in an official and baffling way.

Bam! EULA for anyone! :)


Oh and heres a thesaurus'ed version:


This product isn't intended to perform. It's not even meant to be seen by any person. Your PC might even go kaput or distribute distress to you and those in the environs of you. For such reasons, do not ever inaugurate this instruct.

If you do instate this instruct, as impractical as it would be, don't be expecting it to operate. If it does, that would be very uncommon and you could judge yourself very blessed.

Either way it is a superior proposal not to offer this instructs to any person for the reason that I might in the future decide to stalk who has the software unregistered and litigate them. Consider this your formal admonition.

[TJP1687]

Wow, Deniz! Thank you! Your the biggest help I've had all day! lol Quite funny but I don't think it will serve my purpose. lol But thank you for the laugh.

TJP1687