An explanation of the difficulty of solving licenseproliferation in one sentence
David Dillard
david.dillard at veritas.com
Wed Mar 9 17:53:31 UTC 2005
See below...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fink, Martin R [mailto:martin.fink at hp.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 12:32 PM
> To: Evan Prodromou; Russell Nelson; Eric S. Raymond
> Cc: Open Source License Discussion List
> Subject: RE: An explanation of the difficulty of solving
> licenseproliferation in one sentence
>
> Well Evan - I have to say - you made my day :) I seriously
> considered conjuring up a picture of me and gimp'ing it to a
> visual representative of your comments.... I just didn't have
> the time.
>
> I guess what bothers me the most as I look at the overall
> tone of the messages that have been written on this topic is
> one where a theme of "good vs. evil" is developing. The
> community being the "good", and the corporation being the
> "evil". I guess I just don't look at the problem that way.
I see that as well. And another thing that bothers me is that
corporations are not considered a part of the community. Many
corporations employ people whose primary responsibility is to contribute
to open source (e.g. me).
> In my view, the community creates loads of really cool
> software. I will note at this point that the community is
> now also made up of lots of people from those evil
> corporations. My entire motivation is that I want that cool
> software to be used. I want it to continue its successful
> path at redefining the business model of the industry. I
> think that the community process of developing software is a
> really powerful one. Now, when I think about who uses all
> that cool software, I think of individuals, governments,
> academia, and yes, all those evil corporations.
>
> This last one is the one that causes me heartache. While you
> might think that these corporations have unlimited funds to
> decipher the encrypted OSI code of licensing, you're dead
> wrong. I fear that if the current system continues down its
> current path of exponentially increasing complexity, the evil
> corporations will just give up - not hire more lawyers to
> deal with it. You may violently disagree with this, that's
> fine... time will tell.
>
> So, all my actions are motivated by trying to make sure that
> over the long haul, open source software gets used more, and
> more, and more.
> Now, you may not agree with my methods (I think "stupid" was
> one reference), and that's fine. I also understand that this
> isn't going to get fixed overnight, and that there isn't an
> easy magic pill that's going to make it all go away. And
> yes, heaven forbid, we might actually have to let a few more
> licenses through the system in the meantime.
>
> So, if we can stop the "open source community vs. the big bad
> corporate world" mindset that would be a really good start.
Amen!
> Next, if it's helpful I'd gladly spend some time going
> through a set of reasons why an infinite number of licenses
> will stifle open source utilization rather than foster it.
> Finally, if you believe that an infinite number of licenses
> is not a problem and it's all hogwash, then ignore this
> dialog.... just let the people who care about it come up with
> a proposal that deals with the perceived problem. When one
> or two proposals are put forth (maybe by OSDL, OSI, and
> others) and if you think that those proposals are actually
> harmful, then chime in. The last thing I want is to change
> the system into something that makes it worse.
>
> Now, if you really want to move Heaven and Earth to save me,
> have at it, I'd love to watch :)
>
> Martin
>
> +==========================================================+
> | Martin Fink | Email: martin.fink at hp.com |
> | Vice-President, Linux | Phone: (970) 898-7076 |
> | Hewlett-Packard Co. | Fax: (970) 898-4302 |
> | 3404 East Harmony Road, MS43 | Asst: Ingrid Busch |
> | Fort Collins, CO 80528 | Phone: (970) 898-0782 |
> +==========================================================+
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Evan Prodromou [mailto:evan at bad.dynu.ca]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 7:35 AM
> To: Russell Nelson
> Cc: Open Source License Discussion List
> Subject: Re: An explanation of the difficulty of solving
> licenseproliferation in one sentence
>
> On Tue, 2005-08-03 at 16:54 -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> > But more than anything else, it points to the difficulty of
> getting to
> > a world with only a handful of licenses. If there really are to be
> > fewer licenses, projects must relicense, as painful as that is.
>
> I think that's a completely unacceptable burden on the people
> who put time, money, blood, sweat, and tears into creating
> Open Source (but perhaps not OSI-certified) software. There's
> a big difference between asking a lawyer armada from CA, Sun,
> or IBM to select one of the existing licenses when making
> their big PR announcement, and forcing a 12-year-old project
> to relicense all their software.
>
> I realize that everyone's supposed to move Heaven and Earth
> to save poor, starving Martin Fink, poster boy for license
> proliferation. But relicensing a work with any but a trivial
> number of authors is a huge undertaking. I bet Martin can
> raise his shaky, hunger-weakened hand to rubber-stamp one
> more license, if we ask him nicely and give him a bowl of
> millet afterwards.
>
> I predict that a close reading of the Open Source community's
> give-a-shit-o-meter for the Handful of Licenses Crusade will
> hover just barely above 0.00. Keeping the books tidy is all
> fine, but twisting the arms of little projects on the shaky
> theoretical grounds that "There shouldn't be too many
> licenses! Save Martin Fink!" is wrongheaded and boorish.
> Don't do that.
>
> Software that meets the Open Source Definition is Open
> Source. OSI should do its job and certify it.
>
> ~Evan
>
> --
> Evan Prodromou
> evan at bad.dynu.ca
>
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list