

Fred's ImageMagick Scripts - of
http://fmwconcepts.com/imagemagick/

======
click170
I get that the author wants a portion of whatever money you make with his
scripts, but I wonder if they are aware of the ambiguity in "noncommercial"
licenses. I feel like this precludes the use of these scripts anywhere but
hobbyist projects that you never intend to profit from. And I think that's sad
because the author could be probably make more of a name for themselves by
using a more permissive license like the GPL.

~~~
jacquesm
Maybe he doesn't care about 'making a name for himself' and just wants to eat?

If you use software for a commercial purpose and the price is lower than what
it would cost you to make it yourself then buy don't make is where it's at.

If he wants a 'portion of whatever money you make with his scripts' (that's
called a profit share) then I think he's over-estimating that cost by a
considerable margin, also he's building this on top of ImageMagick which is a
very extensive suite of programs doing all the heavy lifting and these scripts
tie those programs together.

If you don't know ImageMagick enough to string together 6 commands then this
might be a useful resource, if you can then it might serve you as inspiration
just by looking at title and documentation and never downloading the script.

Either way, it's out there without any obligation on your part, for hobbyists
it's a boon.

~~~
click170
I don't disagree, but I would point out that for those who are new to the
industry, making a name for yourself can be a very good way of feeding
yourself in the long term. Perhaps I should have instead framed it as building
his portfolio.

But everyone needs to eat in the short-term too. :)

~~~
SixSigma
I think Fred has enough to eat

[http://www.fmwconcepts.com/fmw/fmw.html](http://www.fmwconcepts.com/fmw/fmw.html)

------
colinbartlett
I've seen these before but I've always stayed away because the costs for
commercial licensing aren't spelled out or even estimated at all. I just never
liked to anticipate the friction involved if I were to incorporate these into
a project that would become a commercial endeavor.

~~~
zdw
"noncommercial" is impossibly vague to enforce.

If a not-for-profit entity like a library used one of these to make a T-shirt
that is sold at a profit (but the profit goes to the non-profit) is that
commercial use?

What if the design is done by a for-profit design firm for the non-profit
library?

What if the non-profit library installs it on it's computers, and they get
used by someone on a for-profit project?

Anytime you put a "profit" based limit on a license, you're probably doing it
wrong. I'd much rather have a GPL style copyleft than this - it's less
invasive.

~~~
carbocation
It's not clear to me that "non-commercial" would permit any for-profit or not-
for-profit use. Both are commercial.

------
droope
I tend to agree that people who write software should -- where possible --
licence it so that people using it for commercial purposes either need to
release the source code (GPL) or in terms similar to Fred's ImageMagick
scripts.

The reason for this is that there is a very active competition between OSS
(open source software) and non-free software and if OSS can access libraries
which non-free software cannot, it gives OSS a very much needed advantage.

That being said, these scripts look incredible! We shouldn't focus so much on
the licence but rather in the incredible effort the author has put in, and the
knowledge he displays (I think it's pretty impressive!)

------
gayprogrammer
I see that the license prohibits rewriting or copying the scripts into other
software. Is there a GUI image editor that works by running modular CL scripts
(such as these) on an image in a simple UX window? I imagine that would not be
against this license.

