Filthy commerce!

Filthy commerce!

by David Shields -
Number of replies: 16

We've developed a utility for moodle users, which inherits GPL, as the components it is built upon are GPL.

We are considering 3 options:

  1. release it GPL as-is, with the caveat "you're on your own with this" becuase it is tricky to configure with AD.
  2. release it configured for required users' site, for a nominal charge per annum to support and maintain it
  3. charge a bigger fee to travel to the users site and set it up for them, installed and documented.

Would we get flamed to a crisp for suggesting these solutions, as the code is GPL, or is this acceptable in the moodle community ?

WaveyDavey

Average of ratings: -
In reply to David Shields

Re: Filthy commerce!

by Eric Merrill -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Moodle HQ Picture of Peer reviewers Picture of Plugin developers Picture of Testers
Well, obviously if you do 2 or 3, you still have to do 1. You have to release any GPL code you are using for profit things, but you can still do the other two as 'consulting' sort of fees.

At least that is my general understanding.

-eric
Average of ratings: -
In reply to David Shields

Re: Filthy commerce!

by David Willington -
I'm not an expert in this area, but if it wasn't for 'filthy commerce' none of us would be able to pay our bills! As I understand the GPL all the above options seem perfectly reasonable. The only thing you have to do is to make the source code available. I know there's more to it than that but I don't see why you should get flamed for the above.

All the best

David
Average of ratings: -
In reply to David Shields

Re: Filthy commerce!

by Eric Merrill -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Moodle HQ Picture of Peer reviewers Picture of Plugin developers Picture of Testers
Also note, I beleive that you are limited in how you can use 'Moodle' associated with any commercial work, unless you are a Moodle Partner, because Martin D. holds the copyright for 'Moodle'. Im sure somebody who knows this in more detail (and for sure) will comment soon.

-Eric
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Eric Merrill

Re: Filthy commerce!

by Steve Hyndman -

Here is the "definitive" word from Martin D himself:

"The ONLY restriction we enforce (and this is a lot less of a restriction than many trademark holders enforce) is that you cannot call it "Moodle Hosting". That's all."

Of course, this does directly conflict with what you will read in many other places (including on moodle.com), but this is what I choose to follow. You can read it here: http://www.alledia.com/blog/general-cms-issues/open-source-projects-not-really-open?/

Steve

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Steve Hyndman

Re: Filthy commerce!

by Jon Bolton -
Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Testers

Slightly out of context Steve - the correspondence you refer to is about hosting services, hence the comment from MartinD about the only restriction being enforced was that the instance to which you refer could not be called "Moodle Hosting".

David - the name Moodle™ is a registered trademark of the Moodle Trust. If you are intending to use the name to advertise commercial generic Moodle services (eg Moodle Hosting, Moodle Support, Moodle Certification etc), then you must seek direct permission in writing from Martin Dougiamas via the moodle.com helpdesk, in accordance with normal trademark restrictions. There are no restrictions on how you use the name in other contexts - see http://docs.moodle.org/en/License for more information.

Examples include Moodle for Mobiles, Moodle Grader, MoodleTxt - txttools.co.uk Text Messaging Module and MoodleSpeex voice recording tool.

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Jon Bolton

Re: Filthy commerce!

by Steve Hyndman -

You are wrong...it wasn't about Moodle hosting at all, it was about the Moodle trademark in general and using the name Moodle...read the conversation at that link. The initial post at that site wasn't about Moodle hosting either.

The conversation was then, was always, and still is about using the "word" Moodle on a site in any context. Martin made his policy (or at least what he enforces) clear in that post. Your post here only tries to confuse the issue again.

Marting was very clear in that post and you can see my follow-up reply in that post as well as on this site. So, since I'm assuming you are not the "official moodle trademark spokesperson" I'm going to go with what was posted there, until I hear differently from Martin. 

Steve

Average of ratings: -
In reply to David Shields

Re: Filthy commerce!

by Michael Penney -
INAL, but it think that If you do 2 and 3, you have to do 1, in other words you can't redistribute the code under a commercial agreement unless it is also released as open source.

Selling configuration and training services should be fine if you are selling configuration and training around your add-on, not general Moodle configuration and training. If you are going to use 'Moodle' in the name of your services or product, you need to get permission from Moodle.com (as you would with using any trademark).

It's always ideal to form an agreement with your local Moodle partner, so that some of your revenue makes it back to the core development team--so they can keep supporting and developing the healthy Moodle ecosystem your add-on will thrive insmile.
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Michael Penney

Re: Filthy commerce!

by Steve Hyndman -

If you are going to use 'Moodle' in the name of your services or product, you need to get permission from Moodle.com (as you would with using any trademark).

Once again, wrong and misleading. You Moodle Partners should leave explaining this to the person who owns the trademark...would result in a lot less confusion.

Steve

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Steve Hyndman

Re: Filthy commerce!

by Martín Langhoff -
Steve, IANAL but I have done my studies in IP law. It's not wrong or misleading, at least under the trademark laws in effect in the western part of the world. Perhaps you need a better lawyer? wink
Average of ratings: -
In reply to David Shields

Re: Filthy commerce!

by Martín Langhoff -
As others have pointed out, it's fair to earn money off OSS, but remember you have to do 1 if you do 2 and/or 3. Just make sure that your expertise shows through so that people are keen to hire you to extend/maintain the utility or just to write something else.

It's tricky to build a business on OSS, but then again, it's damned tricky to build a business in the software industry.
Average of ratings:Useful (1)
In reply to David Shields

Re: Filthy commerce!

by Martin Dougiamas -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Documentation writers Picture of Moodle HQ Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Plugin developers Picture of Testers
Hi, David.

No, of course you won't get flamed smile

The GPL itself is very clear, see http://docs.moodle.org/en/License

There is absolutely nothing stopping you doing any of those three things - good luck with it!

The only issue, as others have raised, could be if you are using the Moodle trademark at the same time. Since these situations are sometimes complex and hard to encode in black and white rules, contact me directly (as described on the licence link above) and we can discuss the details directly. I've given a thumbs up to the vast majority of people who've asked this way.
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Martin Dougiamas

Re: Filthy commerce!

by David Shields -

Yes, I am aware that 2 & 3 require 1, and that anyone who gets our code chunk may without restriction give it away to all and sundry. And that's ok with us, but naturally we cannot as a commercial outfit afford to devote chunks of time to supporting it gratis. We are not restricting the code at all, we are just making a charge effectively for the labour/effor involved in adapting it for the customer site. It stems partly form the faffing required to do some of the ldap / directory mapping stuff as it is really variable dependant on the site network setup, and partly (blush) theat the code is a bit, um, clunky in places. However, it does provide a pretty neat solution to some schools.

I just didn't want to get flames with people thinking we were ripping off moodle / the moodle community / all the developers doing great free OSS stuff, but wanting to help but cover any costs involved in setting it up.

I'll put my asbestos undies back in the drawer.

David

Average of ratings: -
In reply to David Shields

Re: Filthy commerce!

by Martin Dougiamas -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Documentation writers Picture of Moodle HQ Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Plugin developers Picture of Testers
No problem at all, I appreciate you making the effort to check anyway.

I think everyone here understands that all services need to be paid for by someone.

The code is free, but time is not.
Average of ratings: -
In reply to Martin Dougiamas

Re: Filthy commerce!

by David Shields -

Thank you Martin. Asbestos undies now stowed away. Now I just need to get off my idle behind and actually *tell* people what we have made available.

David

Average of ratings: -