From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jan 7 6:23:10 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from math.udel.edu (math.udel.edu [128.175.16.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89FB515682 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2000 06:23:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from schwenk@math.udel.edu) Received: from math.udel.edu (sisyphus.math.udel.edu [128.175.16.167]) by math.udel.edu (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA28249 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2000 09:23:06 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3875F6CA.DBCAFA8B@math.udel.edu> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 09:23:06 -0500 From: Peter Schwenk Organization: University of Delaware X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.7 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en, fr, de, ko MIME-Version: 1.0 To: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: license (no longer Re: uptimes, Woo Hoo) References: <200001071413.JAA17543@blackhelicopters.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I guess I just don't understand why any software business would want to have anything to do with true Open Source software. Sure, you could charge for support and service, but, at least in the home/personal market, nobody likes to pay for that stuff. I can see corporate licensees buying support, however. True Open Source software seems to make it impossible to make big money, which companies like to do. Don't get me wrong. I LOVE free software. I use it all the time. I just don't see how ALL software can be free and we can still have a software industry. I'm a dope, I guess. Michael Lucas wrote: > >From a business standpoint, yes, the BSDL is delightful. "Here, have > this, it's free, do whatever you want with it." What business > wouldn't like that? > > But what do *we* get out of it? Simply the satisfaction of knowing > your work is in a photocopier's brain? > > ==ml > > > It appears to me, at least from a business standpoint, that the BSDL is the > > free-est of all in that all it requires of the licensee is recognition of the > > source of the work. I think that's why Apple's used it for it's upcoming Mac OS > > X. They can use the FreeBSD source and still not be required to ship source with > > their product. That way they can keep whatever fancy stuff they've done to it > > private and keep a competitive advantage. Not very cool from a GPL, Open Source > > standpoint, but I'm sure Apple likes it. I thought I heard a rumor that Apple has > > contributed some source back to the FreeBSD project, but that's just hearsay. > > > > Michael Lucas wrote: > > > > > So, is there any highfalutin' purpose behind the BSDL? Or is it as > > > nonpolitical as it appears to be? Having had this argument many > > > times, I'd like something better than "we don't care"; from an > > > advocacy point of view, that never comes across well. -- PETER SCHWENK | UNIX System Administrator Department of Mathematical Sciences | University of Delaware schwenk@math.udel.edu | (302)831-0437 <-NEW!!! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message