Re: GPL vs. sweatshops (was Re: Bias)

--- "Deven T. Corzine" <[email protected]> wrote:
> What happens if someday the GPL becomes dominant and low-paying programming 
> jobs are the only kind left?  If all the high-paying ones are gone because 
> the GPL killed the revenue streams that made them possible?  At that point, 
> it's hard to call it voluntary.

You and I are in violent agreement on this:  it is possible that a GPL monopoly
could occur, and such a monopoly could be harmful.  But I don't think that the
GPL should be abandoned simply because of that risk.  First, outside of a
monopoly situation, the GPL can be beneficial.  Let's not throw the baby out
with the bath.  Second, even if a GPL monopoly arose, it could be controlled by
legal means (such as copyright law), just as other monopolies are controlled by
antitrust laws.

Ideally, I would like to see modifications to the GPL to reduce its potential
harm.  But, for now, I think having it as an option is more beneficial than
harmful.
 
> I'm concerned about the possibility that programmers might become low-paid 
> or unemployed because the economic model to sustain them under the GPL just 
> isn't there, despite all the assumptiosn to the contrary.

I'm concerned about that, too.  My full time job is as a computer programmer,
so I have a personal stake in this.  But this is a risk everyone takes. 
Eventually, there may be less demand for my job, or someone or something else
may come along that does my job for less than I get paid.  I like my job and my
pay, but I also enjoy the benefits of competition, including lower costs for
goods and services.  

So long as the competition is fair, I feel the personal risk is worth the
benefits.  So far, I don't see the GPL as unfair competition.

> Far from it.  I agree with Heinlein -- just because a company was able to 
> make a profit in a certain way doesn't mean society is obligated to ensure 
> that they always can.

I loved reading Heinlein, but it's been a while.  Can you point me to some
references, I'd love to see what he had to say on the subject.

> But let's not get into a new debate about the evils of modern multinational 
> corporatism.  We've already strayed far enough off-topic by now.

Agreed. :)

> I have no concern about the BSD license taking over the world -- it's a 
> truly free license that wouldn't harm anyone, even if the majority of the 
> software in the world ends up under the BSD license...

It seems to me that BSD software could have some of the same economic harms
that GPL software could.  Take Brett Glass's example of GCC.  If GCC was good
enough that no one was willing to pay for a better compiler, then compiler
writers would be in much less demand.  That is true whether GCC is GPL or BSD/X11.

=====
Sincerely,
Matt Seitz

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com