Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Re: Rugby licnese changed

From: bpaddock:csonline at: 19-Jan-2002 7:10

> IME a lot of the flak the GPL gets comes from companies who would much > rather rip off individuals or groups of coders rather than negotiate terms.
Sudden changes in license structure give the entire concept of 'open source' a bad name, and just encourage more proprietary software to be written and not released.
> It's too much trouble for them to talk to programmers. It's not too much > trouble for them to use their code of course. These companies rather have > code they can use for free, without having to pay an experienced coder to > write it. The GPL forces them to talk, and few of them like it.
I was using a BSD product in a commercial application. Version 1.0, the author changed the licenses when he released 2.0 to GPL. I asked him if I could use V2 as I had been, and he knew I had been using V1 this way, he told me no. There where no money issues involved with either version. So I learned a valuable less not to rely on any software that I didnt' write my self. So I maintain V1 my self and keep using it. I don't know about Dutch law, but in most places you can't retroactively null&void past copyrights for works in existences. Think of what that would mean to every book that was ever printed. So now when I write a comercial application I look what is out there in open source land, read the specs, then go write my own version, if the author tells me I can't use it when I ask. Two reasons for this, I don't know what incompatibilities the next version will introduce since it is not under my control, and getting money out of the 'Bean Counters' to license every piece of code out there that I could use to make my life easier is next to impossible in a cooperate environment. As dumb as it is, they don't care if I spend 100 hours of my time reinventing the wheel, it is a hidden indirect cost to them, but the $99 per X is some thing that shows up on the bottom line. Also that $dollar amount must be marked up, at least by 33% according to the Biz. class I took, and pasted on to my customer. Such a cost increase in a product can not be justified in many cases.
> Quite frankly, I couldn't give a damn about people with that attitude, they > deserve all the trouble they get.
Keep that thought in mind the next time you go to buy any piece of equipment that has software in it, from your car to your are the one paying the cost just as I do when I buy some thing.