Search Results

Search found 19188 results on 768 pages for 'microsoft licensing'.

Page 79/768 | < Previous Page | 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86  | Next Page >

  • How to secure licensekey generation

    - by Jakob Gade
    Scenario, simplified for brevity: A developer creates an application for a customer. The customer sells this app to end-users. The app requires a license key to run, and this key is generated by the customer for each end-user with a simple tool created by the developer. The license key contains an expiry date for the license and is encrypted so the end-user can’t tamper with it. The problem here is that the developer (or anybody who has a copy of the license key generator) can easily create valid license keys. Should this generator fall into the wrong hands, it could spell disaster for the customers business. Ideally, the customer would have to use a password to create new license keys. And this password would be unknown to the developer, and somehow baked into the decryption algorithm in the application so it will fail if an attempt to use an unauthorized key is made. How would you implement a solution for this problem that is both transparent and secure?

    Read the article

  • Using Glassfish libraries in proprietary software

    - by Lóránt Pintér
    I would like to use some parts of Glassfish in a proprietary software that are under a CDDL + GPLv2 license. Am I allowed to do that? I haven't modified anything in the code of these libraries, so is this OK, or my software, because it uses these libraries, is still considered derivative work, and thus a big no-no? I mean, according to https://jaxb.dev.java.net/, JAXB is also under CDDL + GPLv2, but I know I can freely use that in proprietary software. Is this because CDDL + GPLv2 actually allows that, or is it distributed under a different license when bundled with the JRE?

    Read the article

  • MSDN Subscription Question for the lone developer

    - by BrianLy
    I'm looking to get an MSDN Subscription and I see a number of sites offering 2 year subscriptions versions. Are these sites offering a regular version that I can buy or are they for Software Assurance customers only? I don't want to buy one and find out I cannot activate it because I'm not associated with a company that has SA.

    Read the article

  • Software Evaluation license - How safe it is?

    - by Manav Sharma
    almost all the software companies across the globe offer an evaluation version for download. Often the terms and conditions are so many that it's not feasible to go through them. we usually skim through the pages to get to the download link. I was wondering how safe is that? I recently downloaded Rational PurifyPlus for evaluation and I expect that it would cease to function beyond the evaluation period. Are there any changes that the software would quietly move beyond the evaluation period without letting me know thus making me liable? Thanks

    Read the article

  • GPL liscensed frameworks on eccommerce websites

    - by Adam McMahon
    Ok this may be a foolish question, but I just want some clarification on this. If you build a website on a GPL licensed web framework, let's say a browser based game or some kind of kind of sophisticated web application are you required to redistribute all the code? If this is so what licenses would allow you to build on top of an opensource project without requiring you to redistribute the code?

    Read the article

  • Selling an app to a company - How much to charge?

    - by Moshe
    I wrote an app targeting a particular clientele. A software company with a reputation among my target audience is willing to negotiate a price to either license or buy it. As a newcomer to the app store, I am not sure that I will successfully market it myself. What would be appropriate terms of a sale or license and what about pricing? I am looking for answers that draw from personal experience with software, although not necessarily apps. I've seen this post on SO, but it's a few years old and I assume that the app market has changed and stabilized somewhat. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • What Source Code License to use for your project?

    - by Andreas Grech
    I am starting this question to try and make a central point developers can use to choose what Source Code License to use for their projects. What I am looking for out of this question are the following for the Licenses: A short description of the License What type of projects should this License be used for Examples of existing projects that use this License Some of the Licenses that I have in mind are the following: Apache License 2.0 Artistic License/GPL Eclipse Public License 1.0 GNU General Public License v2 GNU General Public License v3 GNU Lesser General Public License MIT License Mozilla Public License 1.1 New BSD License

    Read the article

  • Does ASL License complies with MS-Pl license?

    - by John Simons
    I would like to redistribute a compiled version of Yahoo! UI Library: YUI Compressor for .Net (http://yuicompressor.codeplex.com), that according to the web site is licensed under MS-Pl (http://yuicompressor.codeplex.com/license). The project I work in is release under the terms of Apache Software Foundation License 2.0. According to the MS-Pl license "If you distribute any portion of the software in compiled or object code form, you may only do so under a license that complies with this license." , the term complies is not very clear! Does ASL License complies with MS-Pl license?

    Read the article

  • iPhone App with Thirdparty Code - License Question

    - by hecta
    What do I need to include if my iPhone App uses some third party code under an opensource licence for example BSD or MIT, before submitting for AppStore approval? Is it enough if I let original code with it's comments untouched or do I need to include a readme file where I describe that I used "xyz's framekwork under licence abc" or something like that?

    Read the article

  • Propietary modules within GPL and BSD kernels

    - by Francisco Garcia
    Since the Linux kernel is GPL and not LGPL I suppose that it is illegal to link proprietary code to it. How does the industry circumvents this? I would expect that the GPL license will force any developer to release under GPL driver and/or kernel module. Maybe I am confused and implementing a new module is not really linking against the kernel code ??? How do companies deal with this? Maybe linking the other way around (from kernel to their binaries)? On the other hand there is the BSD kernel. Where you are free to link protected IP. Can you get a better design implementing your drivers within a BSD kernel? Is there any design restriction when implementing drivers for GPL kernels?

    Read the article

  • Can I use a previous version of iText(Sharp) under the LGPL?

    - by Jens
    I'd like to use iTextSharp for PDF manipulation. I need it to run under medium trust (webserver) and to be free of charge (sice this is a very small project), therefore there is not much competition. Unfortunately, since I need it for a commercial project, I cannot the AGPL introduced with version 5.0. Do you know if I may use the 4.x versions using the LGPL? Or is their license automatically updated to the APGL?

    Read the article

  • Community License Agreement for Commercial (SaaS) software?

    - by indomitablehef
    I've got a commercial SaaS application, an online collaboration/lean project mgmt tool. I want to offer a "Community Edition", with specific limitations on how the software can be used, for free. For example free for groups using it to manage open source projects free to K-12 teachers to use in the classroom free for authors collaborating on Lean/Kanban/AgileSoftwareDevelopment books and research papers. free for community conference organizers, user group organizers, etc. The license would grant use of the software with limitations. The software itself can enforce limitations on the number of users/projects. I'm looking for a license agreement / EULA that I can use to specify what uses the software can be used for (see above). It would restrict the users from using it in different ways, such as for commercial use, managing consulting projects, client work, etc. I've been combing the web for good examples of such agreements, and so far coming up short. Any ideas? To be clear, this would not be an open source license of any kind. It would cover the use of commercial software, for specific "community" uses, as we define them.

    Read the article

  • iPhone App with Thirdparty Code - Licence Question

    - by disp
    What do I need to include if my iPhone App uses some third party code under an opensource licence for example BSD or MIT, before submitting for AppStore approval? Is it enough if I let original code with it's comments untouched or do I need to include a readme file where I describe that I used "xyz's framekwork under licence abc" or something like that?

    Read the article

  • virtualbox ose windows binaries

    - by Eye of Hell
    Hello Sun's virtualbox windows binaries are under 'non-commercial' license so can't be used in any company. But source code is GPL. Is it any resource on the network that has a virtualbox compiled binaries for windows? Added a bounty to see if I can get a little more feedback.

    Read the article

  • Is this scenario in compliance with GPLv3?

    - by Sean Kinsey
    For arguments sake, say that we create a web application , that depends on a GPLv3 licensed component, lets say Ext JS. Based on Section 0 of the license, the common notion is that the entire web application (the client side javascript) falls under the definition of a covered work: A “covered work” means either the unmodified Program or a work based on the Program. and that it will therefor have to be distributed under the same license Ok, so here comes the fun part: This is a short 'program' that is based on Ext JS var myPanel = new Ext.Panel(); The question that arises is: Have I now violated the GPL by not including the source of Ext JS and its license? Ok, so lets take another example <!doctype html> <html> <head> <title>my title</title> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://extjs.cachefly.net/ext-3.2.1/ext-all.js"> </script> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="http://extjs.cachefly.net/ext-3.2.1/resources/css/ext-all.css" /> <script type="text/javascript"> var myPanel = new Ext.Panel(); </script> </head> <body> </body> </html> Have I now violated the terms of the GPL? The code conveyed by me to you is in a non-functional state - it will have to be combined with the actual source of Ext JS, which you(your browser) will have to retrieve, from a source made public by someone else to be usable. Now, if the answer to the above is no, how does me conveying this code in visible form differ from the 'invisible' form conveyed by my web server? As a side note, a very similar thing is done in Linux with many projects that depends on less permissive licenses - the user has to retrieve these on its own and make these available for the primary lib/executable. How is this not the same if the user is informed on beforehand that he (the browser) will have to retrieve the needed resources from a different source? Just to make it clear, I'm pro FLOSS, and I have also published a number of projects licensed under more permissive licenses. The reason I'm asking this is that I still haven't found anyone offering a definitive answer to this.

    Read the article

  • Securing against dynamic linking in .NET

    - by Henri
    I want to deploy an application with a license attached. However, I want to prevent that my dll can be easily referenced in visual studio. What are the usual ways of doing this? I was thinking about ngen-ing the application to prevent this, however, then the code becomes architecture dependent. Im not targetting any other architecture/platform besides windows, however, ngen-ing the application after making a release build seems like a workaround to me. Are there any other techniques to achieve this?

    Read the article

  • Question regarding the ExtJS License

    - by stephemurdoch
    Let's say I create a CMS that uses ExtJS. I want to avoid the license fee, so I open-source the CMS on github. Now let's imagine that I make your friend Dave a website that uses my CMS. I spend three hundred hours designing a logo and designing the layout. Can I charge a fee for this, and would I be obliged to open-source Dave's website too or is it enough to just open-source the CMS? I find this LPGL license a little confusing. Say hi to Dave for me.

    Read the article

  • How should I measure Concurrent Licence Usage

    - by Andrew Wood
    Hi I have detailed stats on user access to my system detailing login and logout times as well as machine used, network username etc. I am in need of measuring what I would term a concurrent user licences level based on this information. Now I could take the maximum logged in for any 1 day in a 3 month period say 170 or I could take the average say 133. Does anyone have or know of a formula for working this out or is it as simple as the high water mark which is 170 in my example. A client has recently gone from an unlimited licence to a concurrent licence so I am faced with the task of setting the initial licence level. There is potential for more licence sales in the future so I don't want it set to high and I do want it based on historical data that the system collects rather than guess work.

    Read the article

  • Are Ms-PL and Apache License Version 2.0 Compatible?

    - by Carlos Díez
    I need to use two libraries in a commercial product that i'm developing at work. One library is under the Ms-PL license and the other is under Apache License Version 2.0. I know that Ms-PL is not compatible with GPL according to the FSF, and that the Apache License Version 2.0 is only compatible with GPLv3 (and not with GPLv1 or GPLv2). But i don't know if both licenses are compatible. Any help would be appreciated, even if it is that it is impossible :)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86  | Next Page >