Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 22:34:10 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Market share and platform support Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.19990909210827.04706dc0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <8627.936873473@localhost> References: <Your message of "Thu, 09 Sep 1999 03:01:58 MDT." <4.2.0.58.19990909020511.0473c730@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 03:37 AM 9/9/99 -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: >.... What I said, >in no uncertain terms, was that I'd try to spike the guns of any >effort I felt to be of harm to the project and that's my *personal >stance* on this, one which I hold entirely separate from Walnut Creek >CDROM and would still hold if I resigned tomorrow and saw a predatory >or otherwise harmful 3rd party attempting to do the project harm. >Don't you get it? I don't need to be affiliated with Walnut Creek >CDROM to diss or "spike" a bad product, and if you and your cronies >were to come out with, say, "FreeBSD Ultra L33T CrackOS 10000 - A >custom OS specializing in sniffing and penetration of secure networks" >well then I doubt you'd get any of us over at FreeBSD central going >"wow, this is good stuff, let's help them promote it!" No, what we'd >we'd probably be doing is going "Aieee!! Disavow all knowledge! >Write angry denouncement!" and I'd be right in there with them, going >"aieee!" too. That's what I mean by spiking a product. Angry denouncements are fine. But preventing the use of the code would not be OK, IMHO, even in that case. After all, even the Evil Microsoft Empire uses some BSD code (from which version, I'm not sure). The term "Spiking the guns" implies sabotage intended to do serious harm, not just a denouncement. >Now if you don't do nasty, evil things to the project (though your >past lack of success in "winning friends and influencing enemies" does >make me particularly paranoid where that scenario is concerned) then >you've got nothing to worry about, we're not going to ruffle one grey >hair on your investor's balding heads. Ironically, the only places I have NOT universally won friends and been extremely successful at evangelism (I don't do "enemies") are two: among the Linux/GPL zealots and among certain members of these mailing lists. And only a few of the latter have spoken up; they just tend to be noisy. In any case, I have no intention of harming the FreeBSD project. (I wouldn't mind taking some projects that use malicious licenses down a peg or two via conscious-raising and aggressive competition, but that's another matter.) The entire intent of the messages I post here is, in fact, to help it -- despite the mortal fear of success that some folks here seem to exhibit. > If you do us wrong, however, >then we'll go after you with barbeque forks and we don't need to be >employed by anyone in particular to do that as FreeBSD project >members! Maybe. But no matter how evil I was, the code should -- in fact, MUST -- remain free and open. Currently, the way things are structured, Walnut Creek could repudiate the BSD licensing of anything that one of its employees wrote on company time. All they have to say is, "We didn't give the employee permission to release the code under that license." This is a flaw in the current arrangement that really OUGHT to be remedied -- perhaps by having Walnut Creek pay you through FreeBSD, Inc. or as a consultant. Then, a contract could govern ownership of copyrights. >Something else to consider is that Walnut Creek CDROM is a business >which is also always free to do derived FreeBSD products of its own to >make money and help keep the doors open. Of course. >If you guys start doing >something which competes directly with Walnut Creek CDROM's current or >planned product line then don't be surprised if they make competetive >moves of their own. I'd rather see them carry the product and make a good markup, as they do with other products. But that'd be their choice, of course. > As an employee of that company, I also may very >well help them to do so, and all within the bounds of the BSD license. >Just as you can. All of your engineers can hack away on some >proprietary or even open-source (with some "understandable lag") >solution in an effort to add value to FreeBSD and make your "pro" >product more attractive and Walnut Creek CDROM can too (though it's >traditionally open-sourced all of its non-DOS tools). I'm not going >to give you assurances that Walnut Creek CDROM won't behave like the >business that it is, sheesh, that would be nothing less than a lie >anyway! Creating an enhanced version is all well and good. But Walnut Creek should not use the fact that you're its employee to undue advantage, or to hinder the release of competitive distributions. It can, you know. That's why we have one investor who is opting strongly for OpenBSD over FreeBSD still. He believes that, on the FreeBSD playing field, Walnut Creek would have an insurmountable advantage because it employs you. The others are concerned, too. --Brett 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?4.2.0.58.19990909210827.04706dc0>