InteLib licensing for non-GPL projects

Well, I support free software as you notice. I do not support proprietary software; actually, I hate it. Software must be free. Sources must be open. Always.

To gain more external users, I had to change the license to GNU LGPL instead of GNU GPL for the parts of the library which are actually the library. Please note that the translators and interpreters are still covered with strict GPL. Please also note that even LGPL does not mean public domain. You must follow some certain rules; if they seem to be too hard for you, then you don't use my library at all.

But, well, I've spent ten years to create the library, and also there are some contributions from guys around, so we don't mind to be paid for it, if you really want so. If you don't want to accept GPL and you consider even LGPL too restrictive for you, you can contact me and ask to sell you a commercial license for the library. For as low as USD 50000 (fifty thousand U.S. dollars), I agree to give you the right to do whatever you wish with the library -- that is, non-exclusive unlimited license. Pay and fly. Yes, I can do so: I hold the copyright for the most of the code, and I believe I can either negotiate such a licensing with all the contributors, or simply remove their code so that I become the only copyright holder. Once again, I hereby offer you non-exclusive license to use the library in whatever manner you wish for the sum of USD 50000. To my mind, it's not too much for such a useful thing. If you think it's too expensive, then don't write proprietary software and turn to GPL. At least it would be wise of you.

Please be forewarned that if someone tries to violate my rights (that is, uses the library other way than as LGPL allows, without my prior written permission), then to sue is the matter of principle, courage and honour for me. If my library is used in violation of the license conditions, I assume you must pay for it (see the previous paragraph for the pricing), so you can deduce what charge I will put on you. You can now understand why I have assigned the particular price for a non-free license which is unusual for free software. I specially hate these people who consider Microsoft licenses seriously while assuming free licenses as optional conditions which might be ignored.

By the way, if you know someone doing such a bad thing as a violation of GPL on my library, you can try to make some money out of it. Just report me the violation and help to sue the violator. I agree to pay you 10% of whatever I get from the violator as the charge for the violation.