Comments on: Commercial or Opensource http://www.symphonious.net/2004/02/21/commercial-or-opensource/ Living in a state of accord. Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:29:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: MJR http://www.symphonious.net/2004/02/21/commercial-or-opensource/comment-page-1/#comment-38 MJR Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=31#comment-38 "Selling the software" is not forbidden by GPL. The right to sell the software is part of the freedoms with free software. Several forms of sale are expressly mentioned as permitted in the GPL FAQ. Also, your view of "selling the software" is definitely not the only commercial activity with software. We could probably argue inconclusively about "common usage" for ages. To me, it seems that you do use some bizarre personal definitions, rather than the main ones from OSI and such. I think it's "interesting" that you compare ASL-1 with GPL in answer to a point comparing ASL-1 with FreeBSD. It seems fairly clear that NOTICE is meant to be a place to gather attribution notices outside the licence. "Ode to my goldfish" is not really an attribution notice, as commonly understood. Having to put it in the about box is a good example of why that software might not be free. I also take a strong stance against software patenting, but that includes being against using them to defend against software patents. It is hard to accept that someone really is against software patents if they use software patents to restrict their users' legitimate acts. I think ASL-2 stops short of doing that, but only just. “Selling the software” is not forbidden by GPL. The right to sell the software is part of the freedoms with free software. Several forms of sale are expressly mentioned as permitted in the GPL FAQ. Also, your view of “selling the software” is definitely not the only commercial activity with software.

We could probably argue inconclusively about “common usage” for ages. To me, it seems that you do use some bizarre personal definitions, rather than the main ones from OSI and such.

I think it’s “interesting” that you compare ASL-1 with GPL in answer to a point comparing ASL-1 with FreeBSD.

It seems fairly clear that NOTICE is meant to be a place to gather attribution notices outside the licence. “Ode to my goldfish” is not really an attribution notice, as commonly understood. Having to put it in the about box is a good example of why that software might not be free.

I also take a strong stance against software patenting, but that includes being against using them to defend against software patents. It is hard to accept that someone really is against software patents if they use software patents to restrict their users’ legitimate acts. I think ASL-2 stops short of doing that, but only just.

]]> By: Bagel Belly Blog http://www.symphonious.net/2004/02/21/commercial-or-opensource/comment-page-1/#comment-39 Bagel Belly Blog Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=31#comment-39 <strong>Free Software Fascism</strong> Leo Simmons urges you to "not use the GPL or LGPL for software you write". He gives some reasonable justification for his policy. Not sure I agree, but he has his reasons. One of the comments below his post is the funniest thing I've read in a long tim... Free Software Fascism

Leo Simmons urges you to “not use the GPL or LGPL for software you write”. He gives some reasonable justification for his policy. Not sure I agree, but he has his reasons. One of the comments below his post is the funniest thing I’ve read in a long tim…

]]>