Why are you asking us? We don't have the copyright and we cannot license it to you.
You've already been in contact with the creator, these questions are better suited for him.
Personally, I would think both your scenarios are okay since no-one is forced to pay you for the use. But, as I said, I'm not the copyright holder. You need to either have a lawyer look over the licence or get a very explicit release from the author stating that what you want to do is okay.
Okay, based on your edit.
Here is what my employer would most likely do (a company deadly serious about IP issues).
They would evaluate the relative costs of getting into trouble misusing the program (getting their considerable legal department to evaluate the licence) against that of just clean-rooming the program. They would choose the cheaper option and go with that.
Now here's what I would do, not having my own personal Nazgul of lawyers.
If I couldn't contact the author, then he's probably a one-man show - he'll be able to afford legal representation about as well as I can so will be unlikely to push that hard, in a legal sense.
I would argue that my application is indeed freeware since I'm not charging anything for its use. If a customer chooses to ask for extras (in-app purchase) or make a donation, that money transfer is not tied to the acquisition of my freeware at all.
Of course, if your freeware is near-useless without an in-app purchase, it could be argued that the connection is there between money and product transfers.
But I think I would be quite safe going the donation route. There is an absolute unbundling of the two events (product transfer and money transfer) there and one does not require the other.
Some people have even just asked for donations without a reciprocal arrangement (Save Karyn), although I wouldn't give money to some clown who'd already proven themselves inept at managing it.
Standard disclaimers apply: I am not a lawyer, I am not your lawyer, I don't even look like a lawyer from a hundred yards away.
How much are you compensating the author of the open source program for their work?
I am not sure whether donations would be considered "commercial" under the terms of the license, but from your description it doesn't really seem in the spirit of software you are porting.
And why are you asking us when you can just e-mail the author as you did before?
Note that open source licenses allow commercial use and distribution (see #5 and #6 of linked page). So this is not open source, and whether your scenarios are allowed depends on the actual license.
发布评论
评论（4）
你为什么问我们？我们没有版权，也无法将其许可给您。
你已经和创作者接触过了，这些问题更适合他。
就我个人而言，我认为您的两种情况都可以，因为没有人被迫为使用付费。但是，正如我所说，我不是版权所有者。您需要请律师查看许可证，或者从作者那里获得非常明确的声明，说明您想做的事情是可以的。
好的，根据您的编辑。
这是我的雇主最有可能做的事情（一家对知识产权问题非常重视的公司）。
他们将评估因滥用该程序而陷入麻烦（让其相当大的法律部门评估许可证）与仅仅清理该程序的相对成本。他们会选择更便宜的选择并接受它。
现在，如果没有我自己的私人戒灵律师，我会这样做。
如果我无法联系到作者，那么他可能是一场独角戏——他将能够像我一样负担得起法律代理费用，因此从法律意义上讲，他不太可能强迫这样做。
我认为我的应用程序确实是免费软件，因为我不对其使用收取任何费用。如果客户选择要求额外服务（应用内购买）或进行捐赠，则该汇款与购买我的免费软件完全无关。
当然，如果您的免费软件在没有应用内购买的情况下几乎毫无用处，那么可以说金钱和产品转移之间存在联系。
但我认为我走捐赠路线会很安全。那里的两个事件（产品转移和资金转移）是绝对分开的，并且一个事件不需要另一个事件。
有些人甚至只是在没有互惠安排的情况下要求捐款（拯救 Karyn a>），尽管我不会把钱给一些已经证明自己不擅长管理金钱的小丑。
标准免责声明适用：我不是律师，我不是你的律师，我什至从一百码外看起来都不像律师。
Why are you asking us? We don't have the copyright and we cannot license it to you.
You've already been in contact with the creator, these questions are better suited for him.
Personally, I would think both your scenarios are okay since no-one is forced to pay you for the use. But, as I said, I'm not the copyright holder. You need to either have a lawyer look over the licence or get a very explicit release from the author stating that what you want to do is okay.
Okay, based on your edit.
Here is what my employer would most likely do (a company deadly serious about IP issues).
They would evaluate the relative costs of getting into trouble misusing the program (getting their considerable legal department to evaluate the licence) against that of just clean-rooming the program. They would choose the cheaper option and go with that.
Now here's what I would do, not having my own personal Nazgul of lawyers.
If I couldn't contact the author, then he's probably a one-man show - he'll be able to afford legal representation about as well as I can so will be unlikely to push that hard, in a legal sense.
I would argue that my application is indeed freeware since I'm not charging anything for its use. If a customer chooses to ask for extras (in-app purchase) or make a donation, that money transfer is not tied to the acquisition of my freeware at all.
Of course, if your freeware is near-useless without an in-app purchase, it could be argued that the connection is there between money and product transfers.
But I think I would be quite safe going the donation route. There is an absolute unbundling of the two events (product transfer and money transfer) there and one does not require the other.
Some people have even just asked for donations without a reciprocal arrangement (Save Karyn), although I wouldn't give money to some clown who'd already proven themselves inept at managing it.
Standard disclaimers apply: I am not a lawyer, I am not your lawyer, I don't even look like a lawyer from a hundred yards away.
您为开源程序的作者的工作支付了多少报酬？
我不确定根据许可证条款，捐赠是否会被视为“商业”，但从您的描述来看，它似乎并不符合您正在移植的软件的精神。
您为什么要问我们您是否可以像以前一样向作者发送电子邮件？
How much are you compensating the author of the open source program for their work?
I am not sure whether donations would be considered "commercial" under the terms of the license, but from your description it doesn't really seem in the spirit of software you are porting.
And why are you asking us when you can just e-mail the author as you did before?
请注意，开源许可证允许商业使用和分发（请参阅链接页面的#5和#6）。所以这不是开源的，您的场景是否被允许取决于实际的许可证。
Note that open source licenses allow commercial use and distribution (see #5 and #6 of linked page). So this is not open source, and whether your scenarios are allowed depends on the actual license.
问原作者，他应该有他的许可证的规范解释。
Ask the original author, he should have the canonical interpretation of his license.