RE: LINUX is the "one" ? .... Comments???

Tom, I find myself in rare disagreement with You.

I understand the THEORY behind the GPL license quite well, actually.

What I'm talking about is the practical reality.  Yes, the LICENSEE
(supposedly, again in theory) can't dismiss the author's (LICENSOR'S)
personal choice.

So about half of what You say actually works out.  The parts that don't are
primarily for two reasons:


1)  Because a lotta people have less scruples about cheating and stealing
than a lotta other people.. the LICENSEE actually CAN do pretty much
anything they want as long as it's socially acceptable...  That's what I
call Napsterism.  As this poor sod documents quite clearly.
http://www.ambrosiasw.com/cgi-bin/ubb/newsdisplay.cgi?action=topics&number=1
4&article=000052

"Napsterism" (along with the "Open" Source Movement) is basically what has
absolutely KILLED the potential in the so-called "shareware" or
budget-priced software market.  (Yeah, I know there are modest successes,
btw.)  This was not written by anybody in Bill Gates' tax bracket, in case
that wasn't obvious.


2)  The more important reason is the loophole:  SURE the author can make
money, right?...?  Wrong...  The LICENSEE can do WHATEVER THEY want with the
code.  (Last time I looked at the license, and be glad to find out I'm
wrong!)  One person selling a product, and one Napster-lookalike giving the
very same product away for free...?!?

Well, in my experience, when I do the math that adds up to zero money for
the author.. invariably in almost all marketspaces.


My comments may not have applied, because I'm not ALL that interested in
talking how things work out in THEORY.


| -----Original Message-----
| From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Tom Liotta
| Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 4:06 PM
| To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| Subject: RE: LINUX is the "one" ? .... Comments???
| Importance: Low
|
|
| midrange-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
|
| >   6. RE: LINUX is the "one" ? .... Comments??? (jt)
| >
| <snip every comment since essentially none seem relevant because...>
|
| JT:
|
| In almost everything you write about this, you totally ignore the
| difference between LICENSOR and LICENSEE. You completely miss the
| fact that the AUTHOR may do whatever s/he wishes to do, including
| sell the program for any amount or license it under any
| additional licenses that might come to mind. You totally miss the
| fact that it is _solely_ the choice of the author whether to
| license under GPL or not. And whenever the choice is made to
| release a version under GPL, _you_ have _NO_ right to dismiss the
| author's personal choice.
|
| GPL does _NOT_ explicitly restrict the author's ability to make
| money from the product. It _DOES_ however directly restrict a
| LICENSEE from direct profits.
|
| Tom Liotta