Re: [binc] What license should we use for Binc IMAP in the future?

On Monday, August  8 at 05:34 PM, quoth Bob Van Zant:
>>> Something like FreeBSD where I can give back the changes that I want 
>>> to (think what Apple has done for various open source projects) 
>>> makes me feel good and is probably a fair compromise.
>> 
>> That's no compromise for the user, only the developer, in that ACME 
>> can build a whizbang out of the developer's work and make megabucks 
>> without contributing anything back.
>
> Remember that it takes money to make money. As you well know, ACME can't 
> just take the software and sell it as-is.

True, but without the open-source software, ACME gets to write it's own 
IMAP server and spend even more money. The thing to remember here is 
that there's no such thing as a free lunch. Using an established widget 
as a base for the whizbang, ACME saves lots of development money. The 
other way to do that is to buy the rights (or a license) to a commercial 
established widget. This means more money!

Open-source, rather than requiring monetary payment for the widget, has 
use requirements. If you can't stand the use requirements, buy a widget. 
THIS is capitalism.

> Often times companies utilizing open source in key portions of their 
> business will hire on the lead developer(s) of a project to help them build 
> it. In some sense this is "giving back" in multiple forms. First it is 
> giving the lead developer his dream: getting paid to work on the one thing 
> he loves the most. Second, with the lead developer at the helm it is likely 
> that many of the changes the company makes will end up back in the 
> community.

And you feel this is less likely to happen with GPL'd software than with 
BSD'd software? What (evidence?) makes you think this is the trend?

> It appears that I'm definitely in the minority here. I guess I have a 
> bit more faith in big business than some of the other people around 
> here do. Which is funny because I figure companies break the GPL all 
> the time whereas you think they just use more "open" licenses :-)

That's not capitalism, that's "theft". Just as much as getting a copy of 
a commercial widget's source code without paying for it would be theft.

I'm curious - what makes you think that a company that is willing to 
commit a crime to get ahead financially is going to be more interested 
in using (or contributing openly to) a BSD-style licensed widget than a 
GPL'd widget?

~Kyle
-- 
A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.
                                                   -- Chuckles the Clown

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Thank you for using encryption!

iD8DBQBC+BN6BkIOoMqOI14RAtcGAKD1AIgPGaNiE1p1m0muoSB4EvKGiACfX2EW
hcCSku/Ce5BoBHriCDDZYBc=
=Zta1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----