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

At 01:16 PM 4/12/2005, Taran Rampersad wrote:
>So, since it's not really Free Software for 3 years, you're asking the
>user to be a beta tester for that period?

The first part is largely correct but not quite.  Of the four main freedoms 
(run, access source, redistribute, modify), we only suggest tampering with 
the ability to redistribute, and then only briefly.

On the part about being a beta tester, not really.  Asking that would 
obviously reduce willingness to buy.

>There are many EULAs, but this one is yours....

Yes, but help me out here.  What we propose is really only a short term 
mechanism for allowing a developer to charge, and in a way that guarantees 
new code becomes mostly free always and totally free after a brief 
delay.  Taran, your own statements in other locations indicate you see the 
value of charging:

         On 4/12/2005, Taran Rampersad wrote: < 
http://www.knowprose.com/node/1065 >
         I believe in Free Software but until I become so rich that it's 
offensive,
         I won't be too much of a *software philanthropist*. The pay sucks, 
the
         hours are long, coffee isn't 'free as in beer' and my creditors 
don't know
         what philanthropy means. So I charge for Free Software. I suppose 
some may
         think me evil, but I'm not looking for sainthood.

So clearly you seem to appreciate the value of charging under some 
circumstances.  We're just trying to provide one economic model for 
allowing this to happen.  And we're open to others.

>"Criticize by creating." — Michelangelo

I like the .sig.  It's what we're about.

MVA