Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 10:36:52 -0500 From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pfgiffun@bachue.usc.unal.edu.co> To: "G. Adam Stanislav" <adam@whizkidtech.net> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD and memetics Message-ID: <37209393.8614097F@bachue.usc.unal.edu.co> References: <4.2.0.32.19990422144951.00c60f00@localhost> <000101be8d07$0ae09350$021d85d1@whenever.youwant.to> <19990422235859.E219@whizkidtech.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
G. Adam Stanislav wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 1999 at 02:28:19PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> > Actually, in my experience, commercial developers won't go anywhere near
> > the GPL, because it's way to restrictive. Even the BSD license is too
> > restrictive. Commercial developers need to be able to cut and paste code at
> > will, without having to put disclaimers and notices in their manuals. If you
> > want commercial developers to contribute to your code significantly, it
> > really has to be free and unrestricted.
>
> What I meant was different. I was talking about those commercial developers
> (like Corel) who decide to release their own original software with source
> code. GPL would sound attractive precisely because it is so restrictive. As
> in: "All right, we'll give you the source but you cannot use it to compete
> with us." (I mean no implications about Corel's intentions specifically.)
>
The GPL has more profound implications, for authors it means "we will not make any
more money from this, but neither will you". Netscape and it's GPL-like license is
an example: they lost the war with M$ (or so was said by one of their developers),
so they poisoned the market in revenge.
>
> Personally, I never even look at GPL source code. I feel safer that way.
> Although it may be because I spent the first 29 years of my life in a Communist
> country and see too many ideological parallels between that and GPL.
>
This is true, everytime I read something about "Linux and the new economic model",
I just amaze myself with the amount of BS. The problem is that while we would all
love new tecnologies free for everyone to benefit from them, our economic system
(called Capitalism) is based on money. If someone wants to talk about a REAL
economical model that works with the GPL he will have to eliminate money as a means
of survival..and of course no one will even suggest this upon fear of public
ridicule.
The minimalist suggestion, that "we have to find a way to pay the people that work
on the net" has no weight here: free software isn't payed for, that's what makes it
free. If people receive it freely, well someone will not receive money, and someone
will eventually be unemployed because you cannot compete from scratch with GPL'd
software that has several years of development on it..
Good thing I am a Mechanical Engineer....
Pedro.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?37209393.8614097F>