'GPL encumbrance problems'
jdow at earthlink.net
Thu Jan 19 05:10:45 UTC 2006
From: "Rickey Moore" <wayward4now at yahoo.com>
> Paul Howarth <paul at city-fan.org> wrote:
> It's like seeing some whiz-bang control you might like to use if you're
> a Visual Basic programmer, except that the license for the control costs
> $1,000. If you don't want to pay the $1,000, you don't use the control.
> What's the difference?
> Good example, Paul. There >IS< a 'Gift Debt' that comes from using opensource, which
> according to my perspectives is the imperative to 'pass it forward'. You cannot
> directly repay those whose shoulders you stand on, but you can 'pass forward' their
> gift to the next guy.
> If that concept holds one back, then maybe a serious life self examination is in order.
> Linux is free, but not as in Free Beer. Karma, to me, is a very real thing. One pays for
> one's decisions , and the actions from them. Make a few bad decisions and see what
> happens. Recieving a gift on one hand and wanting pay for some augmentation of the gifts
> on the other just goes against the spirit of the Linux Movement. That concept of 'paying
> forward' is worthy and just, according to all of the Prophets as well. (waxing
> spiritually here.) The Age of Aquarius arrives, steadily although slowly, through
> movements such as this.
> You can make money from your labor, offering support, release copies of CD's, shipping &
> handling. My own project has 6.7 million potential clients, so I figure a buck or so
> average will enable me some of life's basics and some extra to spread around. Sure, I'll
> give away the software! That's a no brainer, I don't need to absorb all the money there
> is in circulation, unlike someone I could name. Just some of it.
THAT is a fatuous comment. If I have to spend all my time offering support
then I have no time to develop new stuff. I eventually starve. Basically
that statement says I must have another source of income than writing
software if I am to be a sole proprietor consultant designing software.
I made the comment as a throwaway not intended as a troll. Rightly or
wrongly I perceive two things, it is impossible for me to write code for
a GPLed system in such a way as to protect my own work from the accidental
side effects of the GPLed system's licenses. I'd need a corps of lawyers
to review everything. I cannot afford that. Nor am I allowed by some
persons' ethics (particularly RS) to earn money from my work directly.
If I write it I "must" release source code or be "unethical". But if
I release source code for a purely software project and do not have time
to "make my money from support" then some company like RedHat will make
the money instead of me. My stomache does not agree with that concept.
It insists on periodic infusions of food, the acquisition of which costs
the money RS declares I am unethical enough to demand. Scroom, the bastard.
That's enough statement for my purposes. It's off topic here. This
discussion should stop now. It's not going to change MY opinion. Nor is
it likely to change the opinion of other people who must work for their
food and do not want to be tied down to an employer who might manage
to RedHat their way through the world.
More information about the users