it's stupid to say : open source (as GPL, LGPL, FLOSS etc..) is not necessary as we can just buy "open source" (but closed in fact) software. because of - closed source is "IP" (intellectuall property - watever this means, abstractive and poor words) and NOBODY exept the owner CAN modify it, change etc.
Closed Source isn't Intellectual Property. Intellectual Property merely is what it is. And what it is quite simply is 'property' (in whatever physical manifestation that takes) generated by one's Intellect(good old grey matter). Closed or Open source is merely a legal framework that defines how persons (other then the 'owner' of said IP) may use the IP in question. For example, say I was the person who came up with the idea of sending data down a wire using packets. The concept of the packet is my IP. I then create a physical manifestation of my idea in the form of a document outlining how my idea works. Assuming I don't destroy the document and leave it forever locked in my mind I now have to make a choice about what legal framework to place around my IP to 'protect' it. Organizations like Microsoft chose to put a heavily restrictive legal framework around the IP (closed source) whereas FLOSS organizations tend to put less restrictive legal frameworks around their IP (open source). And regardless of how restrictive (or not) the legal framework is, it still exists in one form or another. -Drew -- [email protected] mailing list
