Re: FC4 or FC5

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Claim hell - GPL IS more intrusive and evil than the Microsoft
license. The Microsoft license is clearly defined. It's range is
clearly defined and finite. The GPL is clearly defined. It's
range is basically infinite.
Any code you use that belongs to someone else can ask you to do just about anything to comply. If you don't like it just don't use that code. You seem to want people to give you their work for free without any restrictions on what you do with it. You probably think the public library is evil too for asking you eventually return the books you borrow for free and to not rip pages out while you have them. If someone loans you a beach house for the holiday you'd probably think they were jerks for asking you not to piss on the floor while you were there.
Sean, may I ask something out of curiosity? Approximately how old
are you and in generic terms (real-estate office, large software
development company, boutique game company, or whatever) who do
you work for? I'd like to get an idea of where you are coming from.
You SOUND like a college student who has not gotten out into the
real world to find a real job yet. If that is not right I'd like
to refine my image of you and try to figure out where you come
from in this argument.
I manage several businesses (my own and for others) and I've been a professional software developer for more than a decade and have used the GPL as my primary license for all my work for most of that time. I write software ranging from vertical business app stacks to small single purpose web apps. I'm not the best software developer or business manager out there but I do okay. At times it is rough being a software developer, especially as your own small business or doing freelance work, but license has never been an issue in my experience. Using the GPL ensures I, and the total community of users, retain some rights to my code unlike with some open source licenses like the BSD or MIT licenses which offer less protection to the developer. At the same time it allows my customers the freedom to view and modify the source without me if for some reason I'm no longer available to do the work for them or they decide I'm not satisfying their needs. If they want to redistribute the program, with or without changes, without need to provide the code to others then they can easily re-license the code from me at an additional fee (usually a small fee plus royalties). In this way I can ensure that the company using the code is making some sort of contribution to the development of that code and to the total community that uses that code.

If you choose to use other open source licenses then most likely at some point your going to be really mad when you find out your hard work has been taken and somebody else is making a lot of money selling it and isn't giving you a dime or contributing at all to the future development of that work. If you're okay with that then use BSD or whatever else you want to license your code. Just remember that doing so is akin to bending over in a prison shower. It all depends on what you're looking for.

If you choose to not go open source you are setting yourself to compete with a concept that is very beneficial to the users of software, including your potential clients. My experience in business is that it's not a very good idea to put yourself at odds with your own customer base. If something as easy as opening my code can give my customers piece of mind in the validity of their choice in going with me then hey it's an easy choice. I consider it just good customer service. It makes it easier to make the sale and it doesn't cost me a cent. Most of the code I sell isn't available on the Internet even though it is licensed as GPL. I don't post it there and I've rarely had a client post my code either. That'd be rather stupid of them to give away to their own competition what they've paid me for. When they do publish the code though it doesn't have any significant impact on me as the people who download and use it are more likely to pay for my services later and those that don't are usually people who wouldn't have anyway.

If you're just someone that is mad that you can't take GPL code and relabel it as your own work and make globs of money off it without any kind of responsibility to give credit or contribute back to those who actually wrote that code.. well in that case you're probably not very good at business or coding anyway and should go get a job at Burger King.

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux