Licensing issues
18 views
Skip to first unread message
Omer Saatcioglu
Jun 2, 2010, 8:43:01 AM6/2/10
to Automatic Application Licensing
Hi David,
The library is a good idea and I really like to buy it. But, I am not
sure I could pay for a closed source library. As I understood, you are
using android-market-api that is open source. http://code.google.com/p/android-market-api/
So, what about selling the library with the code with limitations like
no forking. I am not expert in open source licensing issues. But, I am
sure there is a way to sell the library with the source code and still
hold the copyright or copyleft.
In that case, I would like to buy.
Best Regards,
Omer
The library is a good idea and I really like to buy it. But, I am not
sure I could pay for a closed source library. As I understood, you are
using android-market-api that is open source. http://code.google.com/p/android-market-api/
So, what about selling the library with the code with limitations like
no forking. I am not expert in open source licensing issues. But, I am
sure there is a way to sell the library with the source code and still
hold the copyright or copyleft.
In that case, I would like to buy.
Best Regards,
Omer
David Keyes
Jun 2, 2010, 10:39:20 AM6/2/10
to automatic-appli...@googlegroups.com
Hello Omer.
There have been some suggestions that I used the android-market-api, but this is NOT true. I evaluated that library, but determined fairly early on that it was too heavy for what I wanted to do. If you look at the android-market-api, you will notice that it, along with the Google protobuf library is nearly 600k in size. I wanted AAL to be 1/10th that size, so I rolled my own (based on some very low-level protobuf code), which was no easy task.
You certainly could do the same thing that I've done using android-market-api, and I encourage you to do so and to contribute your changes back to that open source project. I've considered open sourcing AAL (I'm still considering it), but I haven't found a way to do it that would not make it much easier for pirates to circumvent AAL. That is the primary thing keeping me from giving the source away.
Hope that answers your questions!
Dave
There have been some suggestions that I used the android-market-api, but this is NOT true. I evaluated that library, but determined fairly early on that it was too heavy for what I wanted to do. If you look at the android-market-api, you will notice that it, along with the Google protobuf library is nearly 600k in size. I wanted AAL to be 1/10th that size, so I rolled my own (based on some very low-level protobuf code), which was no easy task.
You certainly could do the same thing that I've done using android-market-api, and I encourage you to do so and to contribute your changes back to that open source project. I've considered open sourcing AAL (I'm still considering it), but I haven't found a way to do it that would not make it much easier for pirates to circumvent AAL. That is the primary thing keeping me from giving the source away.
Hope that answers your questions!
Dave
colinodell
Jun 3, 2010, 6:31:45 PM6/3/10
to Automatic Application Licensing
Its been my experience that all anti-piracy measures (DRM, license
keys, etc) can always be circumvented. Closed-source solutions
usually require some level of reverse engineering to break them. Once
cracked, its usually simple for pirates to redistribute the cracked
software or automated cracking tool.
Whether the source is open or closed, it will still compile the same
(more or less). Pirates will still need to reverse the measure the
same way. Open sourcing it might make it faster for pirates to
circumvent, but their exploit will be the same. The major difference
is that going open-source allows the "good guys" to help build the
library as well. Others will help contribute, improving the solution
and making it more resilient to attacks.
Just my $0.02 on the issue.
keys, etc) can always be circumvented. Closed-source solutions
usually require some level of reverse engineering to break them. Once
cracked, its usually simple for pirates to redistribute the cracked
software or automated cracking tool.
Whether the source is open or closed, it will still compile the same
(more or less). Pirates will still need to reverse the measure the
same way. Open sourcing it might make it faster for pirates to
circumvent, but their exploit will be the same. The major difference
is that going open-source allows the "good guys" to help build the
library as well. Others will help contribute, improving the solution
and making it more resilient to attacks.
Just my $0.02 on the issue.
dadical
Jun 17, 2010, 3:03:05 PM6/17/10
to Automatic Application Licensing
AAL has now been open sourced.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages