Android Question How to sell the code?

hibrid0

Active Member
Licensed User
Hi guys, I make an small app for a company.
On the starting terms I dont sell the code, just the APK with fixes.
Now the company is asking for bought the source.
But how to sell it?
I use a lot of libraries, adapt a lot of examples from here.

What are the limitations on the code I get from here?

The company want to dont sell the app to the competitors, I think if the is ready and I dont have any legal limitation, why not sell to other company? I want more money for my work.
I need to make a list with all source creators from here?
 

udg

Expert
Licensed User
AFAIK, by default libraries created and shared by forum members are licensed under creative commons CC BY 3.0 license: Creative Commons — Attribution 3.0 Unported — CC BY 3.0

Developers can choose a different license if they desire.

About selling the source code.
1) you, in any case, keep the rights as the original author of your software; they can't buy this (and you can't sell it)
2) you can sell the source (for their convenience; e.g. they could decide to hire someone else to manage the project) but this doesn't imply that you have to sell exclusive rights on the code itself (or the project, for that matter)
3) since your project is made up of your code plus several third-party libraries, you should specify it and sell just your code (listing the third-party libs so they can try to acquire rights on them too, if they like)
4) take in account the app name (sell it or keep it at your own discretion)

It could be wise to ask for a legal opinion prior to set up a new agreement.
 
Upvote 0

npsonic

Active Member
Licensed User
AFAIK, by default libraries created and shared by forum members are licensed under creative commons CC BY 3.0 license: Creative Commons — Attribution 3.0 Unported — CC BY 3.0

Developers can choose a different license if they desire.

About selling the source code.
1) you, in any case, keep the rights as the original author of your software; they can't buy this (and you can't sell it)
2) you can sell the source (for their convenience; e.g. they could decide to hire someone else to manage the project) but this doesn't imply that you have to sell exclusive rights on the code itself (or the project, for that matter)
3) since your project is made up of your code plus several third-party libraries, you should specify it and sell just your code (listing the third-party libs so they can try to acquire rights on them too, if they like)
4) take in account the app name (sell it or keep it at your own discretion)

It could be wise to ask for a legal opinion prior to set up a new agreement.
Have to say that I'm strongly against such default licensing. Everything shared here should be under Public Domain.
If someone doesn't like it then they can specify some other license, but as an default everything should be unrestricted.
 
Upvote 0

npsonic

Active Member
Licensed User
That is a bold statement. Does that include B4A as well, free like B4J and B4R? Care to elaborate?
B4A is not shared, it's sold. You buy right to use it.

I meant everything shared on forum such as libs, classes, etc. Current license should be clearly stated on forum if Public Domain is not default.
 
Upvote 0

npsonic

Active Member
Licensed User
You still haven't explained why they should be free?
They already are or are you getting steady stream of income from your libs? It takes few seconds to copy source code from jar file.
Also there is nothing that prevents users to use your libs on there apps that they sell.

There is already place to sell your creations, so sell them fairly or publish them under Public Domain.

Most of the users here are beginners and hobbyists. At least I haven't seen many of the professional programmers here.
So most doesn't understand or even care about licenses here. It would be fare for everyone here to keep Public Domain as an default.
 
Upvote 0

hibrid0

Active Member
Licensed User
They already are or are you getting steady stream of income from your libs? It takes few seconds to copy source code from jar file.
Also there is nothing that prevents users to use your libs on there apps that they sell.

There is already place to sell your creations, so sell them fairly or publish them under Public Domain.

Most of the users here are beginners and hobbyists. At least I haven't seen many of the professional programmers here.
So most doesn't understand or even care about licenses here. It would be fare for everyone here to keep Public Domain as an default.

I feel you are completely wrong.
If you get the source code on any jar library, thats not your right, you are just steal the code. That's is reverse engineering or cracking or in less fancy words stealing code.
If the developer publish a library the code is from him, the rights are from him.
But for example if you make an app without any success, not a big problem. Just ethical.
But if you make an app with some of success, then here you will be on trouble, what happeb if the creator see your creation and confirm you use the code you stealing from him, basically you will lost money.

If is on internet, maybe a human is the owner, the owner define the license.
Check for example Github, lot of code, but that is not domain public, just available for the public and that is different.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

moster67

Expert
Licensed User
They already are or are you getting steady stream of income from your libs?
I was not referring to my personal contributions here on the forum, which by the way are free, except for a few, and many are even with sources. I was mostly interested in your reasoning why everything should be in the Public Domain and free.
So most doesn't understand or even care about licenses here.
This quote apparently explains your reasoning. That is also a bold statement. Just look at the starter of this thread @hibrid0 who indeed takes this seriously, as many other users, and asked a humble question and advice about this.

The thing is that this is a subject which I am interested in and I wanted to hear fellow developers' views on this topic. No more, no less.
 
Upvote 0

npsonic

Active Member
Licensed User
I feel you are completely wrong.
If you get the source code on any jar library, thats not your right, you are just steal the code. That's is reverse engineering or cracking or in less fancy words stealing code.
If the developer publish a library the code is from him, the rights are from him.
But for example if you make an app without any success, not a big problem. Just ethical.
But if you make an app with some of success, then here you will be on trouble, what happeb if the creator see your creation and confirm you use the code you stealing from him, basically you will lost money.

If is on internet, maybe a human is the owner, the owner define the license.
Check for example Github, lot of code, but is not domain public.
what happeb if the creator see your creation and confirm you use the code you stealing from him
To make sure that you have wrongly used someone else's code developer would have to decompile apk that is also illegal.

It says in GitHub that
However, without a license, the default copyright laws apply, meaning that you retain all rights to your source code and no one may reproduce, distribute, or create derivative works from your work.
but the thing is that I wouldn't compare B4A forum to GitHub. It's not even close.
There is very few professional programmers here and I feel that current licensing terms on this forum and everything shared here aren't made clear at all.
 
Upvote 0

Star-Dust

Expert
Licensed User
...Most of the users here are beginners and hobbyists. At least I haven't seen many of the professional programmers here...
...There is very few professional programmers here and I feel that current licensing terms on this forum and ..
Thanks for the estimate you have, I will remember when you need help in the forum
 
Upvote 0

hibrid0

Active Member
Licensed User
To make sure that you have wrongly used someone else's code developer would have to decompile apk that is also illegal.

It says in GitHub that

but the thing is that I wouldn't compare B4A forum to GitHub. It's not even close.
There is very few professional programmers here and I feel that current licensing terms on this forum and everything shared here aren't made clear at all.
You are so funny, if the advantage is for you is right, but if is for other is bad. Decompile in both cases.

But maybe you are wrong again about how to work the real world.
If your software is suspicious of steal software (and your software have money success) , I'm sure exist a legal tool to Decompile your code with legal rights or proof that in other way, maybe memory loads, just something like legal inspection.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

npsonic

Active Member
Licensed User
Thanks for the estimate you have, I will remember when you need help in the forum
I'm not professional and never said I was, but I have also worked with multiple real professionals and doesn't see them here.


This thread has already sidelined from what it supposed to be most likely, because of my comment, so maybe we should just stop.

I have my opinions of current licenses and everyone have there own.
 
Upvote 0

moster67

Expert
Licensed User
so maybe we should just stop.
I agree

Back to topic, @hibrid0:
My view is that if you sell the sources, you should only furnish the source. Basically you use the export-function in B4A. Since the buyer would need to buy a valid license of B4A, they can then download the libraries needed. If you have written your own libs for the project, you should of course provide them. If the libs are paid libraries here on the forum, then the buyer should buy them as well. Make sure that your project is up to date and works well with latest B4A.
 
Upvote 0
Top