One thing is conspicuous by absence from the article "Why you probably shouldn’t add a CLA to your open source project": the role of a CLA in a "dual licensing" business model.
Some free software projects are funded through selling exceptions to a copyleft license. Oracle uses this with its free database products, such as MySQL and Berkeley DB. Or a video game console emulator may be distributed to the public under the GNU GPL, while selling a license to a video game publisher to make, customize, and sell a proprietary version that includes the ROM of that publisher's game. But in order to sell the exceptions, as I understand it, the maintainer needs a suitable assignment or license from all contributors. Is there anything better than a CLA to establish an exceptions-based project funding model?
One thing is conspicuous by absence from the article "Why you probably shouldn’t add a CLA to your open source project": the role of a CLA in a "dual licensing" business model.
Some free software projects are funded through selling exceptions to a copyleft license. Oracle uses this with its free database products, such as MySQL and Berkeley DB. Or a video game console emulator may be distributed to the public under the GNU GPL, while selling a license to a video game publisher to make, customize, and sell a proprietary version that includes the ROM of that publisher's game. But in order to sell the exceptions, as I understand it, the maintainer needs a suitable assignment or license from all contributors. Is there anything better than a CLA to establish an exceptions-based project funding model?