Le licenze Open Source in generale non ti proibiscono di addebitare una commissione per la distribuzione del software. Ti è anche permesso di addebitare una commissione senza fornire alcun valore aggiunto, anche se non sono sicuro di quante persone potrebbero farne uso.
Il problema è che sotto GPL devi dare agli utenti esattamente gli stessi diritti che hai ottenuto da te, quindi non puoi proibire ai tuoi utenti di rivendere il software (GPL) per un importo inferiore. Con altre licenze, le libertà che devi dare ai tuoi utenti variano.
Riguardo alla tua applicazione di avvio, questo è coperto dalle FAQ GPL sotto Vorrei incorporare Software coperto da GPL nel mio sistema proprietario. Posso farlo?
You cannot incorporate GPL-covered software in a proprietary system. The goal of the GPL is to grant everyone the freedom to copy, redistribute, understand, and modify a program. If you could incorporate GPL-covered software into a non-free system, it would have the effect of making the GPL-covered software non-free too.
A system incorporating a GPL-covered program is an extended version of that program. The GPL says that any extended version of the program must be released under the GPL if it is released at all. This is for two reasons: to make sure that users who get the software get the freedom they should have, and to encourage people to give back improvements that they make.
However, in many cases you can distribute the GPL-covered software alongside your proprietary system. To do this validly, you must make sure that the free and non-free programs communicate at arms length, that they are not combined in a way that would make them effectively a single program.
The difference between this and “incorporating” the GPL-covered software is partly a matter of substance and partly form. The substantive part is this: if the two programs are combined so that they become effectively two parts of one program, then you can't treat them as two separate programs. So the GPL has to cover the whole thing.
If the two programs remain well separated, like the compiler and the kernel, or like an editor and a shell, then you can treat them as two separate programs—but you have to do it properly. The issue is simply one of form: how you describe what you are doing. Why do we care about this? Because we want to make sure the users clearly understand the free status of the GPL-covered software in the collection.
If people were to distribute GPL-covered software calling it “part of” a system that users know is partly proprietary, users might be uncertain of their rights regarding the GPL-covered software. But if they know that what they have received is a free program plus another program, side by side, their rights will be clear.
Quindi, in breve, se il programma di avvio genera il codice GPL in un processo diverso e non pubblicizzi la tua applicazione di avvio come contenente o incorporando il codice GPL, non ci sono problemi. In tal caso, i vari programmi sono considerati lavori indipendenti per la legge sul copyright.
La licenza GPL è la più severa in questo senso. Le altre licenze menzionate sono più facili da incorporare in un'applicazione proprietaria.