I've been working on my hydroponics software for a while now. it's a program to control a greenhouse or grow room. it handles the light timers, pumps, fans, heaters, cameras, ph/nute strength... I only have a simple website up so far growcontrol.com it's coming together and is ready for beta testing, but I haven't prepared for the legal and licensing side of things. this is what has been holding me up lately. I'd like to talk to a lawyer before writing anything in stone, but I'm making a stop here first on the forums. if you understand this stuff give me some guidance.
first, the general direction of licensing. I think the open source community could really help bring my program to it's full potential and destiny. I do like the idea of open source, but this is my baby. somewhere over a year of work put into it, and I'll gladly keep working on it for many years to come. I'm not sure because good things can come from not making it open source also. I know there is a huge potential market out there for my creation and we're sitting on the verge of legalization that could make the market explode. what if my software has what it takes to build a business around it. I'm not greedy, but I'm looking at my livelihood. if a living can be made off this, that would free up my time to continue working on this project as well as others. I could offer technical support by phone and email, fix bugs much faster, and release new versions and features much more often.
there are 2 major parts to the system, hardware and software. the software could be open or closed source, free or a low price to buy, or a mixture of both where there's a free version with an unlock key for more features. I'm leaning harder towards open source with the hardware then I am the software. here's a good example: before the personal computer back in the day, ibm tried to market their own pc. they used off the shelf hardware (open source hardware) in order to build it cheaper and quicker. they paid microsoft to develop the software that ran on it. hence how the term ibm compatible came to be. it was created using existing parts and just needed assembly. ibm lost big on the pc market and microsoft was wise enough to license out their software to the manufacturers.
I think this is where I stand. the software is of my own creation, but the hardware needed to use the software is just a few off the shelf parts. it can be made to work with only a handful of parts from your local radio shack for 10 bucks. that leaves me with only one other option if I'd like to make any sort of income from the project, the software. I can assemble the hardware into kits and sell them relatively cheap for people who can't solder, but as soon as it does well, some foreign company can step in and mass produce their own version. the software is what I can control with whatever licensing method I choose. I don't like the idea of forcing people to pay money for the software, but at the same time, you can't feed yourself by working for free. I need legal guidance and your ideas.
first, the general direction of licensing. I think the open source community could really help bring my program to it's full potential and destiny. I do like the idea of open source, but this is my baby. somewhere over a year of work put into it, and I'll gladly keep working on it for many years to come. I'm not sure because good things can come from not making it open source also. I know there is a huge potential market out there for my creation and we're sitting on the verge of legalization that could make the market explode. what if my software has what it takes to build a business around it. I'm not greedy, but I'm looking at my livelihood. if a living can be made off this, that would free up my time to continue working on this project as well as others. I could offer technical support by phone and email, fix bugs much faster, and release new versions and features much more often.
there are 2 major parts to the system, hardware and software. the software could be open or closed source, free or a low price to buy, or a mixture of both where there's a free version with an unlock key for more features. I'm leaning harder towards open source with the hardware then I am the software. here's a good example: before the personal computer back in the day, ibm tried to market their own pc. they used off the shelf hardware (open source hardware) in order to build it cheaper and quicker. they paid microsoft to develop the software that ran on it. hence how the term ibm compatible came to be. it was created using existing parts and just needed assembly. ibm lost big on the pc market and microsoft was wise enough to license out their software to the manufacturers.
I think this is where I stand. the software is of my own creation, but the hardware needed to use the software is just a few off the shelf parts. it can be made to work with only a handful of parts from your local radio shack for 10 bucks. that leaves me with only one other option if I'd like to make any sort of income from the project, the software. I can assemble the hardware into kits and sell them relatively cheap for people who can't solder, but as soon as it does well, some foreign company can step in and mass produce their own version. the software is what I can control with whatever licensing method I choose. I don't like the idea of forcing people to pay money for the software, but at the same time, you can't feed yourself by working for free. I need legal guidance and your ideas.