On Wednesday 10 January 2007 23:52, Sachin G Nambiar wrote: > > FOSS actually does imply the right to modify and distribute. > > Shouldn't the term freedom be restricted to modifying the code? If > a coder has to earn a living using principles of FOSS then the > clause about "free to distribute" should be removed don't you > think?
Really?. do read the list archives for understanding the business end of FOSS. But just for u 1) Building on (using) other peoples work requires u to compensate them either in cash or in kind (code, bug reports etc) 2) Keeping any code built for internal use (as permitted by the gpl) results in a maintanence nightmare that quickly dissipates any initial advantage you may have gained eg M$ IE and TCP stack (both picked from FOSS projects). If M$ does not stand a chance u are doomed before u start. 3) closed source fallaciously presumes that only u have all the bright ideas - in reality quite the opposite. so you are shutting off all the other brilliant people from contributing to your code. 4) If your code is so shallow that copying and distributing by college kids is going to put you on the streets, u are better off searching for the best street corner than running a business. -- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
