Only adding a post to this one because I've been thinking about this problem and this is an appropriate thread to express it. Of course, smarter people than I have thought about this, so I realize I'm just putting it down "for the record". I imagine it's been written in this forum before. I'm not necessarily saying that GOTD should make any changes.
The problem, however, is that the one size fits all license takes practically all the value out of a commercial giveaway. Obviously, that's because anyone who ethically sticks to the spirit of the license is only getting an unrestricted demo. That's sounds good, but is it really that much more valuable? A time restricted demo or a partially disabled demo is, in most cases, enough to decide whether you want to buy a particular software. So, the ethical user really gets little extra incentive to try this software versus any other commercial software of the same type, since they don't get a copy they can ethically use for free. At least not the way it was intended to be used. When GOTD offers either a home use software, a commercial use software that can be used for non-profit purposes, or a game; the user's gets one free copy they can ethically use in exchange for being a tester. the difference between the two situations is, obviously, why we get so much whining in the comments section when commercial use software is offered. Note, I'm not referring to Rist's legitimate question here when I say whiners.
Maybe GOTD should offer a different license in that situation but even that wouldn't work for a developer whose single copy can work on multiple machines - like a networking software. Of course, if anybody wants to suggest a better idea.... I think, though, we've should understand that all those whiners at least have a point in this situation, since it basically goes against the GOTD theory: a giveaway to users for the purposes of feedback and increased word of mouth.