[asterisk-biz] Fascinating conversation with a prospective customer

[Paul]

Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:

>
>
> On 1/7/07, *Tim Panton* <thp at westhawk.co.uk
> <mailto:thp at westhawk.co.uk>> wrote:
>
>     This is always a tricky balance for folks.
>     What we have done in the past is to offer to delay the
>     release of customer specific modifications
>     to the opensource tree.  In one case
>     we delayed it by 6 months to allow the customer
>     to extract the bulk of the commercial benefit .
>
>     Before anyone howls that this is in breach of the GPL,
>     it wasn't because a) the software was under a BSD license
>             b) westhawk is the license holder.
>     (It wasn't asterisk :-) )
>
>     I imagine however you could probably strike such a deal
>     with Digium too.
>
>
> you also dont have to give back to the tree with the gpl.  The gpl
> only states that you have to make the code available to anyone you
> distribute binaries to, and that you have to license your code under
> the gpl.  Its all based on who you distribute to, not the fact that
> you created it.  With the GPL you can delay as long as you want to
> give back to the tree, however you cant enforce that on anyone you
> gave code to - they would be free to give it up sooner.

That is exactly right if the customer is not looking for something to
resell as a shrinkwrap binary. However, you still need to write a
realistic contract. Even if I destroy all copies of source, notes and
docs I have a good memory for concepts used. I want the contract to
clearly specify the restrictions placed on my future work and the
duration of those restrictions.

Anybody on either side of a contract that includes non-compete clauses
should understand the legality of those clauses. You can't lock somebody
out of the area where they normally earn a living without proper
consideration(compensation). More than one lawyer has advised me in that
direction.