Jim Erwin wrote: > there will always be people trying to make money off of Open Source > code. even if their contribution is minimal or zero. i'm surprised > they even bother to ask permission. > > i'm confused, tho. i thought the License Agreement requires that one > must distribute the EXACT source code used to compile the binaries? in > most cases the customer does not even know what 'source code' IS. they > buy it; it works; the end. > > i think it's unethical to use FlightGear as part of ANY commercial > product. also, when (if) the customer finds out he paid for something > that should be free, will that matter? it would to me. > > Jim > There is nothing wrong with adding value to open source and charging a fee for the result of your time, expertise, risk and effort.
"The one exception is in the case where binaries are distributed without the corresponding complete source code. Those who do this are required by the GNU GPL to provide source code on subsequent request. Without a limit on the fee for the source code, they would be able set a fee too large for anyone to pay—such as a billion dollars—and thus pretend to release source code while in truth concealing it. So in this case we have to limit the fee for source, to ensure the user's freedom. In ordinary situations, however, there is no such justification for limiting distribution fees, so we do not limit them. "The one exception is in the case where binaries are distributed without the corresponding complete source code. Those who do this are required by the GNU GPL to provide source code on subsequent request. Without a limit on the fee for the source code, they would be able set a fee too large for anyone to pay—such as a billion dollars—and thus pretend to release source code while in truth concealing it. So in this case we have to limit the fee for source, to ensure the user's freedom. In ordinary situations, however, there is no such justification for limiting distribution fees, so we do not limit them." -- http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html What you're not supposed to do is to take away people's opportunity to reproduce and understand your work. "Free software is about free speech, not free beer." --ibid Consider Linux. I am using my new Android phone. It's built around the Linux 2.6 kernel and assorted other open-source software. Surely Google and Motorola deserve to profit from rolling those resources into a full out-of-box usable product. And I'm glad to pay for it. I'm also glad to be able to know what is going on under the hood. Best, </edg> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-users
