Re: dual licensing try 2

On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 05:18:01PM +0100, Gabucino wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > > It helps the developers.
> > It helps the developers doing bad things
> It helps the developers avoiding potentially harmful and time+money consuming
> lawsuits.

This is completely a non sequitur.

> > Suppose MPlayer is licensed to some 'pay-per-view' company, and that
> > company is given the right to distribute modified versions of MPlayer
> > to their users without giving the right to distribute modified versions
> So what? They already do/can do it right now! MPlayer's source is open,
> and everyone feels free to steal, in case you haven't noticed.

No, a couple lamers do, and they're losing business because of it.
Also once you get off your asses and figure out how to file suit in
whatever country KISS is in, rather than wasting time thinking up
stupid ways to help them abuse the code even more.

Keep in mind: PAYING someone to be able to release proprietary
derivative works does not make it any more acceptable to do so. It's
wrong whether they pay or not!!

> Would _you_ support a lawsuit?

What kind of support do you need?

BTW, if your real concern is not being able to defend the copyright,
then we should assign copyright to the FSF so they will defend it for
us. Selling non-free licenses is NOT going to make defending it any
easier.

Rich