I'd get rid of the non-commercial requirement, but I guess you have a reason for choosing it. But it causes incompatibilities with GPL'ed software for example, since the GPL requires commercial to be allowed.
Creative Commons has a nice license chooser, if you want a proper licence with the restrictions you currently have: http://creativecommons.org/choose/ For example the BY-NC-SA (attribution, non-commercial, share-alike) license is pretty much what you have currently. It is still GPL incompatible, however.
Comments
I wish he'd use a proper license. I can't mix it with anything like this.
such as?
- dmitrygr
Hi Dmitry.
I'd get rid of the non-commercial requirement, but I guess you have a reason for choosing it. But it causes incompatibilities with GPL'ed software for example, since the GPL requires commercial to be allowed.
I'd recommend one of the licences listed on http://opensource.org/licenses like the GPL.
Creative Commons has a nice license chooser, if you want a proper licence with the restrictions you currently have: http://creativecommons.org/choose/ For example the BY-NC-SA (attribution, non-commercial, share-alike) license is pretty much what you have currently. It is still GPL incompatible, however.
The Free Software Foundation has a list of licences too: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
Thanks for your patience.
I considered GPL, for a while, actually. I'll think of it some more