Recently Microsoft has released a free version of Visual Studio: Visual Studio Community Edition
the license says
IF YOU COMPLY WITH THESE LICENSE TERMS, YOU HAVE THE RIGHTS BELOW.
- INSTALLATION AND USE RIGHTS.
a. Individual license. If you are an individual working on your own
applications to sell or for any other purpose, you may use the
software to develop and test those applications.b. Organization licenses. If you are an organization, your users may
use the software as follows:· Any number of your users may use the software to develop and
test your applications released under Open Source Institute
(OSI)-approved open source software licenses.· Any number of your users may use the software to develop and
test your applications as part of online or in person classroom
training and education, or for performing academic research.· If none of the above apply, and you are also not an enterprise
(defined below), then up to 5 of your individual users can use the
software concurrently to develop and test your applications.· If you are an enterprise, your employees and contractors may
not use the software to develop or test your applications, except for
open source and education purposes as permitted above. An “enterprise”
is any organization and its affiliates who collectively have either
(a) more than 250 PCs or users or (b) more than one million US dollars
(or the equivalent in other currencies) in annual revenues, and
“affiliates” means those entities that control (via majority
ownership), are controlled by, or are under common control with an
organization.c. Demo use. The uses permitted above include use of the software in
demonstrating your applications.d. Backup copy. You may make one backup copy of the software, for
reinstalling the software.
As an “Individual” I’m interested in the clause “a”, however it’s not that clear and explicit. for me it sounds a bit restrictive as it does not cover a wide range of usage (Open source, freelance work, contribution to applications you don’t own etc), the confusion comes exactly from the terme ‘OWN‘ used in the sentence,
I may be misinterpreting the whole thing as English is not my native language.
So how would you interpret the sentence?
Can we assume that we can use a software if the license does not make it clear, for example “it’s not allowed to use it in this or that senario” as for “Entreprises” in the clause “b”?
18
It looks like size of your client is important.
From Visual Studio 2013 and MSDN Licensing Whitepaper – November-2014 page 10:
“Example 2: A Fortune 500 firm has outsourced the development of its store-locator mobile application to a small agency. The application is not an open source project. The agency has 5 employees working on the project and would like to use Visual Studio Community 2013. Since the agency is a contractor developing this application for the Fortune 500 firm, and since the application is not an open source project, the agency cannot use Visual Studio Community 2013 for developing and testing the application. “
So your small team can’t develop customized app for big company. Don’t know what about boxed apps. Don’t know what about “individual”.
I’ve done some more research and it looks like small teams can sell apps build with VS2013Comm. There are no restrictions in EULA who can buy it. I guess the key words are sell and outsource. When you sell, it’s still your app. While outsourcing, usually app isn’t yours but clients.
That’s my story and I’m stickin to it. Let me know if you think I’m wrong.
2
Clause (a): “… working on your own applications …”
The example cited by Dudley is a situation where the small agency is creating what’s known as a “work for hire” — the work in question will belong to the Fortune 500 firm. Normally it is not the small agency’s “own application”. The agency cannot, for example, sell it or give it away on street corners or open-source it — because the created work belongs to the Fortune 500 firm. Note that this would still be true if the company outsourcing the work to the small agency was a small company. US law is clear in these situations: works which normally would be the property of their creator(s) are the property of the outsourcing firm. The size of the outsourcing firm is not the controlling factor. It is the nature of the outsourcing relationship. (The same ownership rules prevail when you agree to do development work for a firm as a temporary contractor.)
In order for the small agency to claim the work as its own — and therefore be able to argue that clause (a) applies — it should have a provision in its contractual agreement with the firm that specifies the small agency retains ownership of the software and other intellectual property it creates during the engagement. It can also include a provision that grants the firm an unrestricted, perpetual right to use the software for its internal operations and/or make it available for use by its customers as a mobile store-locator.
Be aware that most firms will not readily agree to leave ownership of the intellectual property with the developer, and most other developers competing for the business will not ask for such terms.
2