Open Source Business Found Parasitic, and the ADCL
Chris Gray
chris.gray at acunia.com
Thu Mar 13 12:10:44 UTC 2003
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 maa at liacc.up.pt wrote:
> OPEN SOURCE BUSINESS FOUND PARASITIC
> --WORK IN PROGRESS--
> Version 1maa (2003-03-12)
> (C) Mário Amado Alves
>
> (I intend to publish this text in a wider medium than this list, unless
> essential faults are found in it. I welcome any collaboration: I can change
> to we. The title is also changeable.)
>
> I am an open source fan. I say this right away to clear up any impressions to
> the contrary given by the title. Specifically, I have the utmost respect and
> admiration for all existing open source businesses: RedHat, MySQL AB, etc.
> (trademark signs required?) It is not their fault that their business is found
> parasitic.
>
> I am also a believer in intellectual property.
The noise you hear is of RMS exploding. ;>
> Specifically, I believe that
> authors (copyright owners?) are entitled to a just compensation for the
> commercial use of their work.
>
> So, naturally, I want to combine these two principles (open source and
> intellectual property). However, I have found this to be very hard, if not
> impossible.
>
> In the rest of this text I explain the problem in detail, and propose
> solutions. Open source business being parasitic is just one aspect, risen to
> title status simply for its provocative appeal.
>
> The current reflections are about open source in connection with the business
> of selling software; not support, or anything else that is associated with the
> software but that is not it.
>
> Most open source licenses, including GPL, simply forbid selling the software.
Nonsense.
[Rest of article deleted]
--
Chris Gray
VM Architect, ACUNIA
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list