From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Jan 16 10:47:17 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0320937B419 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:47:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA26875; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 11:47:06 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020116113905.01ccea60@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 11:47:00 -0700 To: "'emailrob' spellberg" , FreeBSD Chat List From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: FreeBSDmall vs Daemonnews mall In-Reply-To: <3C45C7FD.BA16A3D5@emailrob.com> References: <3C459893.44485DA3@emailrob.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20020116085240.01c9e3e0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20020116102625.01e4f880@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 11:35 AM 1/16/2002, 'emailrob' spellberg wrote: >no matter how many vendors, there is ultimately one source. Not true. Vendors will, and should, add value. >not true. >the quality of the code does not result from > the nature of the source of the code. This is just plain silly. The quality of the operating system is the direct result of the quality of the code. >it comes from review of the submissions by competent people whose > many responsibilities include keeping out the unsatisfactory. >however many layers of review may exist, > ultimately a small number of people must make a decision. >i want these people to err on the side of caution and > i want their fists to be nuclear. Sorry, but in that case you are seeking a commercial model, not an open source one. Truly free code, such as that which is distributed uner the BSD License, can be used in any way one pleases -- including the creation of a bad product. (Windows, for example, includes code from FreeBSD.) But this does not hurt BSD one bit. >all software should have owners. >the public domain is a class of owner for this purpose. You're talking nonsense. Public domain code EXPLICITLY has no owner. >whoever owns the trademark, > it should be used by those who advocate the use of the product. So long as the trademark is owned by a commercial entity, that entity will have a financial motivation to restrict the activities of its competitors. If it's a public company, it can literally be sued by shareholders if it doesn't maximize profits. >you have it backwards: > i was advocating that the entity holding the mark be a vendor itself, > in addition to other vendors under contract to it. You are naive. If a vendor has to beg for permission from a direct competitor to get permission to sell a product, it is best advised to get out of the business. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message