Sorry to bring yet another license question 
itās just make it real clear for freelancers.
If a freelancer has a contract for just a couple of days (or more) with a company āCā to work an a closed-source (and juce-splashscreen free) software, then :
thatās correct?
Thatās correct.
Interesting, as the freelancer usually has no control, how long this product will stay on the market.
But maybe a good leverage for the freelancer to negotiate a maintenance contract
EDIT: another thought, if the freelancer is <50k and the one who hired is >200k, so is it still an indie licenseā¦? Sorry for creating edge cases, just curious, had recently a similar setting (which is now sorted another way)ā¦
the general case here is that we charge a license to the person who works with the code and sells applications in binary form.
So, if youāre a freelancer, and you sell binary software to a third-party company that distributes it, you may use the license that corresponds to your revenue, not that of the company.
If the company maintains the code, they will have to get a license, too.
ah, very good. So for the freelancer that leaves the option to deliver the code and build script only, and the company will need their own license, so they can build and sell it as long as they want. Sounds fair for all.
Could I just ask for clarification on that first sentence @jb1? What are the ongoing commitments for freelancers who are not delivering binaries, only contributing to source code, and have no control when/if products are released and how long they will be on the market for? I donāt really think this is an āedge caseā as there are a lot of people I know who are JUCE users that fall into this category.
If the company builds the binaries from the source code, they will have to buy a license too.
Thatās what I meant, thanks.
The freelancer builds the software for testing anyway, but chances are he/she has one already.
Or he/she is covered under the personal one, tests with the splashscreen, and the client builds with itās own license the binary to be sold.
Hey Doug,
If youāre hired as a freelancer by a company that builds and distribute JUCE-based applications, you will need a license to do that. You can have your own Indie license and thatās fine, or the company can cover you with a license.
yes thatās correct
itās not clear to me anymore now!
I (my one man company) got a license. I develop and build and distribute a closed source software.
I contract a freelancer to work on the code.
Does this guy need to buy a (perpetual?) license or not?
Yep, totally understand that the freelancer would need their own license. The question is whether they effectively have to go for the perpetual one as they donāt have control over how long the product will be on the market (and arenāt getting any ongoing financial benefit from it). I would have assumed that a freelancer working under those terms would just need to cover themselves during the time they are professionally working with JUCE, but your answer above confused me a bit as it seemed like you were saying otherwise.
If you hire a dude for a month, pay for a 1month subscription for them! Itās not hard! And itās only like $35.
I just want to make it clear if he does need or not a perpetual license
You have to commit to a 12 month plan - so youād have to pay for a full year of subscription. Itās easier if the freelancer has their own subscription and includes it in their rate. As someone hiring a freelancer, there appears to be no way of verifying if a freelancer does indeed have a license or notā¦ you have to trust themā¦ unless ROLI came up with a system where they could be verified.
Rail
Well, if you hire a freelancer, then the freelancer could use the GPL license. I mean: he is going to give you the source code anyway. Because I guess thatās what you have hired him for. Or maybe I am wrong here?
Read the previous posts in this thread - the freelancer has to have a license if their code ends up in any commercial software which isnāt released under the GPL license.
Of course there are questions then about what happens if you end up rewriting the majority of their codeā¦?
Rail
Ok Iām still a bit confused. My situation is this one : Iām building an app for a company that will sell it.
I understand that I need a licence that corresponds to my revenue. Thatās clear.
What about the company ? What licence do they need ?
Is there any difference if they just sell that app (they have access to the binary only) or if they sell the app and maintain the code (binary and the source) ?
The company you sell the app to will need a license if they work on the code. If they only resell the binary and you are the maintainer, you will be the only one needing a license.
