[openip] Re: GNU License for Hardware

Angelo Schneider angelo.schneider at xcc.de
Mon Oct 25 09:51:52 UTC 1999


now we come to a point, please read below.


Arandir wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Angelo Schneider wrote:
> > >
> > > If people have to pay per copy, then the program is not free software,
> > > and it is also not open source software.
> >
> > I do not get that.
> >
> > a) One uses my software to gain profit:
> >       he has to share his profit with me
> >
> > b) One uses my source to derive work:
> >       he has to chare his work with mine
> This is exactly one of the mistake Troll Tech made with their first license. 

Question (but see below also):
Why was/is that a mistake?

> first glance, it seemed quite sensible to me: Free for Free Software,
> proprietary for proprietary software. What it does however is deny that Free
> Software can be commercial software. If all Free Software remains "freeware
> with source", then it will never cross the boundaries from hobby programs to

Can you explain that? 
What are the reasons, are there any evidents/examples for that? 
What would be the difference if it would be free from the start off?
Why should it not work to SELL commercial licenses and to grant
FREE licenses for the GNU project or open source projects e.g

I do not get what kind of boundary you mean and in which way it can't

> professional programs (professionals get paid).
>  --
> Arandir...
> _______________________________
> <http://www.meer.net/~arandir/>

Counterexample: JACOB a free/commercial JAVA->COM Bridge.

In Fact I do even not see any change in QT, only the Linux Version is 
"FREE" the other versions are still proprietary.

But I do not like to bind my license to the OS.

Best Regards,

Angelo Schneider           OOAD/UML           Angelo.Schneider at xcc.de
Putlitzstr. 24         Patterns/FrameWorks       Fon: +49 721 9812465
76137 Karlsruhe             C++/JAVA             Fax: +49 721 9812467

More information about the License-discuss mailing list