On 9/18/19 8:26 PM, Ken Tanzer wrote:
On 9/18/19 6:03 PM, Ken Tanzer
wrote:
Charging for installing
PostgreSQL is not the same as charging for
PostgreSQL.
Bottom line: you charge for services
you provide not for software that other
people provide.
That's just really not true. There is nothing
that prohibits you from selling Postgresql. I
mean, it's not a great business model because you
can get it for free, but there's nothing that
stops you from doing it.
Quoting Adrian Klaver in this thread from about eight
hours ago: "You cannot (legitimately) charge the
pharmacist for any part PostgresQL."
Actually that's Rob Sargent you're quoting. Adrian took
issue with that statement, as do I. While Google isn't
finding me anything that says "Yes, you can sell
Postgresql," here are a few points:
- Point to anything in the license wording that says you
can't charge money to distribute Postgresql. You can't.
- Even software licensed under the GPL, which is a
considerably more restrictive license, can be sold. The
free software folks consider the right to sell as one of
the freedoms associated with free software. [1]
- The Postgresql license page says it is "a liberal Open
Source license, similar to the BSD or MIT licenses." [2]
The MIT license itself explicitly states that it grants
rights to "sell copies of the software."
How do you sell what you don't own?
--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
|
