IPL as a burden

Frank LaMonica frankl at valinux.com
Mon Jan 15 20:29:16 UTC 2001

I think you have misunderstood my comments.  I have no problem with companies making
money in an open source environment.  My comments did not refer to money in any way,
they were directed at the human element - i.e.,, time - that it takes to negotiate the
interactions between all of the licenses used by players in our community when many
pieces of software are used as components of larger projects.  I also deliberately
avoided stating my personal opinions regarding the use of the GPL, LGPL, or any open
source license.  For the record, I believe that only API's, data formats, and
OS infrastructure code needs to be open source.  Any time company A has to pay a toll
to company B for the right to interact with company C, then there is a problem.   That
has nothing to do with the license discussion at hand, but is just in reply to your
divergence to philosophy.    Back to your IPL proposal.  The license may be approved
by some Washington law firm, and if you feel it is adequate, then it is obviously your
decision.  I just gave you my opinion - an opinion you solicited.  If you were just
looking for an endorsement of your proposed license, then I apologize for interfering.


Ralf Schwoebel wrote:

> Frank LaMonica wrote:
> > but differ from the GPL or LGPL.   Each such license places additional burdens on
> > the entire open source community.  Those burdens devolve from the inevitable
> Dear Frank,
> thanks for the input, but I have to disagree. The lack of the word
> money is the burden of the OpenSource community and even companies
> like VA or RedHat have to feel that these days. And the GPL comes
> from a time when students changed the world and coolness was a skill.
> Now we have 2001 and the idea of Open Source needs a kick, because
> we need applications now and everybody thinks its cooler to work
> on an operating system, not an application.
> We see no other possibility than enabling people to charge money for
> sources without violating the basics of OpenSource:
> Anyone is allowed to use the software, everybody has access to
> the sources, etc. pp.
> This money goes to the developers and they can pay their bills.
> And by the way:
> Our license is approved by a very good and accepted lawyer in
> Washington DC (some senators and HUGE software vendors agree to that)
> and is suitable for the Virginia law, since software licenses have to
> fit the state laws, not the federal law in the US.
> --
> best regards,
> Ralf "puzzler" Schwoebel
> CEO, intraDAT international inc.
> 11250 Roger Bacon Drive (#3)
> Reston, VA 20190
> Tel.: 703 796 0000
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: frankl.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 354 bytes
Desc: Card for Frank LaMonica
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20010115/5b810456/attachment.vcf>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list