Re: Charging the Charger [was: GPL v3 public performance idea?]

Marshall W. Van Alstyne wrote:

>
>> But another aspect of this is that for 3 years (maximum in hypothesis),
>> the initial copyright holder would probably also have to support the
>> product, and if that is the case, then what's the difference between
>> GPLing with a support contract? I don't see one. It's just another way
>> to collect money - the actuality is really the same.
>
>
> Agreed, support is one issue. But, another reason why users sometimes
> pay for software is that there is often functionality not offered in
> competing products.

So, since it's not really Free Software for 3 years, you're asking the
user to be a beta tester for that period? After 3 years, when it's
actually working right, it's available at no cost? And implicitly,
you're denying the copying of the software which opens you up to
'illegal copying'.

Does this mean you join the BSA? With 20% or so of software in the U.S.
being used without an appropriate letter of marquee, where does this
license fit in? And outside of the U.S. it's usually more.

> This is also a key reason why for-profit firms _write_ software and
> this motive ought to at least be acknowledged by a license.

There are many EULAs, but this one is yours.... It's odd for me to view
this discussion, because it's very much the same as that letter that
Gates sent to the hobbyists club. It's almost like seeing a proprietary
license evolve into what it is today.

It's a documented fact that in software engineering, the most amount of
time and effort goes into support. The economical model for this license
would seem to indicate that companies would open the code when it would
not be economically viable for they alone to support it, which makes
sense in a business context.And it doesn't, because it means less people
may become exposed to it such that they need custom development and/or
support done.

>
> In a version of the model we're developing, we can consider the
> proportion of developers who are freedom versus profit motivated and
> this does seem to change the kind of license that becomes optimal.

Toss in all the failed models for software cost estimation and you're
certain to have fun with this model you're developing.

-- 
Taran Rampersad
Presently in: Esteli, Nicaragua
[email protected]

http://www.linuxgazette.com
http://www.a42.com
http://www.knowprose.com
http://www.easylum.net

"Criticize by creating." — Michelangelo