From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,3e26dfa741e64e5f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!fu-berlin.de!news.szn.dk!news.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!not-for-mail From: Jacob Sparre Andersen Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GNAT GPL 2005 Edition is now available Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 15:49:41 +0200 Organization: Jacob's private Usenet server Message-ID: References: <1126875543.239666.325290@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <3467d$432b0af1$49956f8$22115@ALLTEL.NET> <87r7bi6e5o.fsf@willow.rfc1149.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: hugin.crs4.it Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: jacob-sparre.dk 1127310581 18564 156.148.71.67 (21 Sep 2005 13:49:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: sparre@jacob-sparre.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 13:49:41 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:xcWzQ3ZcxTF8hC1vPxNP6B5qHRQ= Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5003 Date: 2005-09-21T15:49:41+02:00 List-Id: Preben Randhol wrote: > Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote: >>That might be possible, but I suspect that FSF would be happy to pay >>the cost of disputing such a contract in court. > > Why? I don't see how a (GM)GPL software license influences the > conditions for qualifying to get access to a paid-support service? That condition can be seen as an attempt to do something the (GM)GPL clearly says is not allowed. I am pretty sure I would be able to convince a Danish court that such a clause should be considered a breach of the agreement in the (GM)GPL. Whether it would help me much with getting support afterwards is a different matter. >>Another angle is that whenever I do consulting work, one of the >>conditions is that the code can be published under an Open Source >>license (which one is generally up to the costumer). As long as you >>give your costumers a chance to get first to the market, it seems >>like they don't find it problematic. > > The problem is if you have spent 1-10M euro on research and have > come up with results you don't want the competition to take from you > by knowing how the database is constructed. If you distribute the database and it really is 1-10M euro better, you can be sure that people will find out anyway. The trick is to stay in front of the pack. I don't know any software companies doing research on quite that scale, but the one chemical processing company I know does spend that kind of money on developing new technologies - and then publish it [1]. By the time the articles are reviewed and published, they're already working on the next improvement anyway. Greetings, Jacob [1] Occassionally as patents, but they claim (and seem) to try to avoid taking out patents, since they mostly are a waste of money on lawyers. -- "This page inadvertently left blank."