Re: Realtime/embedded project to help with employment.

[Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com>]

Well, I don't dispute that the GPL can be successfully used in 
developing and marketing a product. I simply dispute that it is the only 
"right" way to develop and market a product. I also dispute the notion 
that someone like RedHat didn't effectively get their engineering work 
done free of charge by a group of developers who released their work 
under the GPL.

Mind you, I don't fault RedHat for that. Linux was there under the GPL 
and RedHat didn't hold a gun to anyone's head and insist they give it to 
them free of charge. The guys who developed it can stare at RedHat's 
profit line and wish they had it, but they have nobody to blame but 
themselves. They voluntarily put up the "sweat equity" in RedHat and 
didn't get a single share of stock in return. That's their decision and 
they are the ones that have to live with it.

 From my perspective, I might make some software I wrote available to 
the rest of the world at no cost and in open source provided it was not 
used for some form of commercial gain (personal and internal-business 
use, not for resale). The minute someone wants to put it into a product 
and sell it, I want some piece of the action. I think that's basic 
justice and that's why I wouldn't release anything I wrote under the GPL 
- unless, possibly, there was a business case to be made as to why this 
particular piece of software would make me money if released under the GPL.

Dr. Leif and I disagree on some of the particulars of his ADCL, but we 
both wholeheartedly agree on the basic concept behind it - that if 
someone develops software that another party wants to use to make a 
profit, the developer ought to get something out of it. I can't and 
won't force that position on someone else, so if a developer wants to 
release his code under the GPL, that's his business. I just wouldn't do 
it myself and I wouldn't advise others to do it either unless there were 
particular circumstances that made it warranted. (Think about why the 
Grateful Dead allow bootleggers to record their live concerts and sell 
them without royalties to them. It promotes the band and helps them sell 
concert tickets as well as their studio albums without really cutting 
heavily into sales they might have had.)


MDC

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> 
> No one (here, anyway) has said otherwise. Notice that GNAT/ACT has
> been purely GPL from inception, and nevertheless their developers
> are compensated for their work, so there is proof by existence that
> the GPL and getting paid can coincide. The same model should work
> in other circumstances. That is, you find someone who has a critical
> need for a software product that does not yet exist, and is therefore
> willing to pay for it, but also does not mind if the product is free
> software.
> 


-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic
I work for: http://www.belcan.com/
My project is: http://www.jast.mil/

Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g

     "In general the art of government consists in taking as
     much money as possible from one class of citizens to give
     to the other."

         --  Voltaire
======================================================================