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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,52a0bacbcdd2da17 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-08-14 07:03:17 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!uninett.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail From: Preben Randhol Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Realtime/embedded project to help with employment. Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 14:03:16 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology Message-ID: References: <3F367B39.8060108@noplace.com> <1060611604.45048@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <3F38DEBC.8040208@noplace.com> <1060696097.54858@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <3F3A306D.4050302@noplace.com> <1060785619.779768@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <3F3B860B.3040502@noplace.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1060869796 24735 129.241.83.78 (14 Aug 2003 14:03:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 14:03:16 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:41452 Date: 2003-08-14T14:03:16+00:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: > The *point* is, a body of software developed by one party has *value* > and that if it is used by another party in a for-profit venture, the > other party is getting a contribution to his business without any > compensation being given to the author. Why that isn't plainly obvvious > to even the most casual observer, I don't know. What the GPL does to > somehow or other stop the software contribution from having value, I > don't know. Of course it doesn. Why isn't it plainly obvious to you that the GPL ensures that any additional work done must also be GPL. So if I make a library and you add more things to it I can use that too. If you use the GMGPL then you must be aware that other may use your work to make a close sourced tool and charge a lot of money for it and you won't get a penny and neither any software. > The software has value. Nothing has value unless there is a market for it. > You use it to make a profit. You give nothing > to the author. It isn't illegal when its under the GPL. It doesn't > defraud the original developer who voluntarily gave away his valuable > property to you in the first place. It simply means that the developer > wasn't compensated when the developer had every moral right to have > insisted on it had he not voluntarily done some charity work for your > business venture. Well say that this business fixed X bugs in the software, the author can thus take this version and continue his work on that. > Like I said elsewhere, people have an absolute God-given right to > freely do charity work for business ventures if they so choose. I'd > question the wisdom of that and wouldn't do so myself, because my work > has value and if you want to use it to make money, you'll have to > share it with me. But that's just me. ;-) Well if you do other kind of work there are always somebody who earns money from it. Say you collect a lot of used clothes to send to a country in need. The company you send it with will charge you money for the shipment. -- �I think fish is nice, but then I think that rain is wet. So who am I to judge.� - The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy (radioplay)