Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 23:22:30 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> To: "Brett Glass" <brett@lariat.org> Cc: <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Richard Stallman came to town Message-ID: <000601be9d08$faf03ce0$021d85d1@whenever.youwant.to> In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.37.19990512233737.0441e410@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I just want to note publically, that while I too believe that GNU/GPL/GLL are evil, it is not at all for the reasons that Brett Glass does. I am not afraid that other people giving their software away will reduce the market for my software. I have no fear of competition. I don't believe in the 'poisoning the well' theory. I have no objection to people willfully and knowingly giving away what is theirs. My opposition to the GLL/GPL is strictly because it is specifically designed to reduce the quality of commercial software. In many cases, in fact, it has even reduced the quality of 'competing' free software. See my more specific comments below: > At 10:47 PM 5/12/99 -0400, Crist J. Clark wrote: > > >Hmmm... I do not see how that can be true. The _original_ programmer, > >the orginial copyright holder, cannot use his own code anyway he would > >like? Sure, the copies of the code that are already out there are > >really 'out there' and cannot be retroactively un-GNUed, but I don't > >see how the original author is prevented from licensing a derivative > >work, or even an unmodified version, anyway he sees fit. > > He may have the right to, but there's no point; no one will license > functionality that users now expect to be free. Umm, that's just not true. I've written several products that compete with 'free' products, and I've had no problems. You just have to make your product better. But you'd have to do that if the competing products were commercial. When corporations compare, for example, NT to FreeBSD, the cost of the OS is rarely a major factor. Few real software purchases are cost sensitive, because the value of the software is so much higher than its cost. > >Huh? What's to stop that same kid from writing a copycat program and > >distributing it as Shareware, under other Freeware licensing, or even > >putting it in public domain. > > It's called "getting paid." The GPLed product has poisoned the well; > forget about being able to make money from such a product. Bullshit. I don't see commercial databases like Oracle and Informix going away because of MySQL. I don't see NT going away because of FreeBSD or Linux. Competition simply raises the bar, and thus the quality. It's good. Imagine if I'm choosing between two products, and I value my time at $60 an hour. Product A is free, but will take me two more hours to setup, configure, and maintain. Product B is $100, but has a nicer installer and management interface. Which will I use? > >I personally don't go to the > >extreme that _all_ software should be GNU, but I do think that the > >existence of GNU or a foundation actively trying to increase the pool > >of GNU software is not evil. > > It's certainly destructive. It poisons markets and deprives programmers > of their livelihoods. Please. I don't see any programmers suffering. I don't see any restaurants going out of business because of soup kitchens. "Protect me from competition" is the cry of the mediocre. DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000601be9d08$faf03ce0$021d85d1>