Alain: Will these commercial ventures contribute
anything to the coffers of the group so that we can
become self-financing?
Anthony: What expenses would the partnership have?
Alain: Let me start with the administrative stuff:
1. Registering the trademark on the name of our
software; 2.
Alain: That's ok. We are open source. Our wares are
not for sale. They are made available to everyone,
for free. The sale of OpenKard would indeed require
unanimity because it goes against everything this
partnership supposedly stands for.
Anthony: Umm? I thought we were going to allow
Alain: To be considered GPL we would merely have to
insist that derivatives of OpenKard will be open
source too, correct?
Anthony: Standalones would have to be GPL then, too.
Alain: I suppose that you (and Scott) are right that
standalones would be considered derivative works.
Anthony:
I'm going to install MPW again on my machine when I get round to doing it,
and then I'll look into this. However, what to do with Brian's problem
under CWP 5, I'm not sure. Maybe the MPW version will work for him, too. I
only have CWP 4, and I won't get P5 any time soon, so you're on your own,
Uli:
For example, do
we allow the hypothetical company that we will name
MicroSloth to make just enough modifications to our
source code (e.g. a fork) and scoop our entire effort,
and make a bundle with it?
Hey!
why do people always tend to attribute other people's words to me? I
didn't say
At 5:07 PM +0100 on 11/13/99, M. Uli Kusterer wrote:
Alain: Let's be clear that the issue is whether
OpenKard derivatives (forks) can fork commercially or
whether it is in our best interest to insist in
writing that OpenKard derivatives must remain free and
open, like GPL does. That
At 12:11 PM -0800 on 11/13/99, Alain Farmer wrote:
Alain: Will these commercial ventures contribute
anything to the coffers of the group so that we can
become self-financing?
Anthony: What expenses would the partnership have?
Alain: Let me start with the administrative stuff:
1. Registering
At 12:32 PM -0800 on 11/13/99, Alain Farmer wrote:
Alain: What I was writing about in my previous mail is
the sale of the OpenKard project/partnership itself.
In other words, a buy-out offer from a company that
would make our work proprietary.
I say we should be able to sell the partnership
At 1:55 PM -0800 on 11/13/99, Alain Farmer wrote:
Anthony: In short, if we use the GPL as is, then all
standalones must be under the GPL. If we add a clause
exempting standalones, all I have to do to make it
closed-source is create a standalone. The GPL would
work, were it not for these
At 5:30 PM +0100 on 11/13/99, M. Uli Kusterer wrote:
At 11:24 PM +0100 on 11/10/99, M. Uli Kusterer wrote:
But again, since MC and HC are so close,
this will be child's play once the initial conceptual decisions are made.
It won't be a problem.
Hmmm... Sounds like I need to resume my UI paper.
At 2:30 AM +0100 on 11/14/99, M. Uli Kusterer wrote:
Of course the preformatted message is the way to go for me (it's what I
did for the name vote, right?). A web page with a form to fill out also
isn't a problem, but it's a web page while I still prefer e-mail. Having
both is fine with me,
Since we are revisiting this conversation, I have two
questions:
1) Whatever happened to our tentative decision to use
the Public Domain license?
This seems to have everything we are committed to.
You can always have a "free" version available to you.
2) It was never really explained all that
Alain: It is not so much the resale of OpenKard
without adding value that is at issue here, Uli. It is
cheesy, in my opinion, but we will allow that. One
hopes of course that they will at least attempt to add
something more to their offer instead of just the
convenience of not downloading the
Personally I would appreciate _any help from Scott or MC and would be willing
to draft whatever would be useful to help this project. On that point your
'lite' license appears to be the same as your 'heavy' license. If you wish I
can draw up a license for the 'lite' version that would limit its
Alain: Are you saying that a clear winner is NOT
emerging?
Alain,
no, I was trying to say the exact opposite.
Alain: The HyperCard List managed a fund-raising
effort to publish an add in a magazine easily enough.
It would be better however if we didn't have to depend
on charity to finance our
Alain: Let's be clear that the issue is whether
OpenKard derivatives (forks) can fork commercially or
whether it is in our best interest to insist in
writing that OpenKard derivatives must remain free and
open, like GPL does. That licencing-restriction would
prevent MicroSloth from turning their
Alain: If we want to allow for the possibility of our
partnership to enter into some form of business later
on down the road, and thus expose everyone in the
partnership to liability, then unanimity must be
required. If majority-rule were to prevail here
instead of unanimity, then dissenters
17 matches
Mail list logo
