Open Source Business Found Parasitic, and the ADCL

[maa at liacc.up.pt]

Quoting Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com>:

> Quoting David Johnson (david at usermode.org):
> 
> > I've listened to both sides of the argument. One side says "you can't 
> > make any money selling Open Source Software" and the other side says 
> > "yes you can make lots of money selling Open Source Software." Well, 
> > BOTH sides are chowderheads!
> 
> Entirely possible if not likely -- but you've just changed the subject.

Not really. Actually I found David's post one of the most educative for me, 
the original poster (of both threads). I think he captured the essence of my 
concerns.

> The original gentleman (maa at liacc.up.pt) claimed that "Most open source
> licenses, including GPL, simply forbid selling the software",

I stand corrected on the letter, although not in the principle. "Forbid" is in 
fact the wrong word. I'll change to "impeed" or something.

> and that
> the OSD's "no discrimination against fields of endeavour" clause
> requires businesses to "either sell to all recipients... or give away to
> all [covered software]".
>
> Speaking for myself, I merely pointed out that these statements are
> objectively wrong, and suggested that he read more carefully.

This claim I keep. I've seen no disproof of it.

> Did I correctly understand that he also posted some sort of draft
> licence, and suggested that the OSD be altered to accomodate it?

Yes.

> Well,
> at least the licence inclusion is a step forward from the last guy.

That was the idea :-)

* * *

I should say that my stand now is to accept hapilly not being Open Source as 
per the definition. I'll still try to have a business model and license that 
conciliates aspects of open source and charging money for commercial use.

Thanks,
--MAA

-----------------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through NIAAD: http://www.niaad.liacc.up.pt/


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