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

On Wed, 12 Jun 2002 14:59, Roland wrote:

> At 08:37 AM 6/12/02 -0500, Sean C. Farley wrote:
> >On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 20:35, Roland wrote:
> > > Experience with WINE and other projects shows that it can also work
> > > the other way round.  Companies will decide to use the available GPL
> > > codebase and adapt their business model accordingly.  Maybe it will be
> > > harder to get a ROI but on the other hand you have to invest less
> > > money!
> >
> >How have any companies adapted to WINE's license change?  What companies
> >have used GPL code that they themselves did not write with substantial
> >success?  What does their revenue look like?
>
> Well, if I remember correctly, Lindows is also starting to use the LGPL
> tree and NOT the Rewind tree.

I wonder if they are using something proprietary for their software
package.  If the reasoning behind the license change is correct, the
existance of Lindows will hurt WINE.  Why develop the WINE tree when
someone will write it for me with the money I pay them?

> I didn't make any claims as to financial success. Only time will tell
> if there will be success in the long run.

Well, you did mention ROI and money.  Actually, I was just curious.

> Just to make my position clear. I also favour the BSD license. But I
> came to the conclusion that the GPL has also its advantages. So I no
> longer dare to say: the BSD license is always better. There may be
> some cases where the xGPL makes sense and to be honest I'm not yet
> fully convinced if it will be good for WINE on the long run...

The only advantage I have seen for the GPL over the BSDL is for
companies wanting to be able to sell proprietary versions of the code
while making all of the "free" software people happy.

For unbridled open-source projects, I have not seen any help from the
GPL.

Sean
--------------
[email protected]