On Tue, 06 November 2001, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
> Greg London wrote:
> > Given a proprietary program that uses open-source code, 
> > you have more users that can find bugs in code, 
> This is called taking advantage of the gullible, 
> and is not one of the principles of open source.

Your code is still open. people can send you fixes
from open-source programs or from proprietary programs.
there is nothing gullible about it. the full benefit 
is still there for your open-source code, regardless
of who USES it.

> Except patents, et-all, or that must be just my imagination. 

nice red herring. software patents can restrict ALL licenses.
it's irrelevant. once you have a patent, it doesn't matter 
what the copyright license is.

> Also, it is a lost of  valuable time from the life of both 
> the closed source programmers and open source programmers. 

so, you wish to prevent proprietary use of open-source 
programs because you want to save the proprietary developers
from wasting their time? 

and how did the open-source developer get his/her time wasted
by having a proprietary developer use his/her code?

> proprietary use of open-source code seems to me 
> like a direct violation of principles 1, 2, and 3 
> of the open source definition.

this is exactly the notion that I've been talking to:
the notion that only open-source software should
be able to use open-source software.

as if proprietary use of open-source software would
somehow take away from the open-source software being used.
The open-source software is still protected by copyright,
still licensed under whatever license, still available
to updates, mods, and fixes by the author.

if proprietary use of open-source software violates
1,2, and 3, then these points are in direct conflict
with OSD point 9.

> PS: please, stop misquoting me with remarks 
> that seem to intentionally lead others into 
> thinking I've said things which I have not.

the 'measure of success' post was not in reply
to any message you sent. I quoted no one in
the original post, including you. It was in general
reply to several of today's posts which all 
contained side comments supporting the notion
of keeping proprietary developers from using 
open-source software.

and everyone expressed in some way or other
that their belief is in the "spirit of open-source".

But it is nowhere in the OSD, 
is actually countered somewhat by OSD #9,

The OSI website even mentions how open-source can
be an leverage point for closed software:
: Loss Leader: In this model, you give away 
: open-source as a loss-leader and
: market positioner for closed software. 
: This is what Netscape is doing. 

The statements against proprietary or closed software
that I've been hearing on this list lately
are NOT in the spirit of open-source.

Closed software developers can actually be considered
a "customer" of open-source software.

Greg


--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

