Sachin G Nambiar wrote:
My apologies for ruffling feathers which i evidently have! We disagree
on what freedom is here, my point i reiterate, i like the idea of
opening up source to the end user because it's the end users right if he
has paid for it. But it's also the givers right to restrict me from
distributing it. If he says i can i will, but i wont hold a grudge
against someone whom i have paid for his software if he does not want me
to distribute. Simple!
You are confusing between open software that you publicly
distribute/sell to many and customized software made for an individual
company. FOS Software created and customized for a company is anyway
private and will not be distributed to others. FOS Software
sold/distributed openly is open for distribution ( of the code ) by all
under the GPL. When you create software you are free to choose the
license under which you want to distribute it according to your
ideological beliefs. The FOSS ideology believes that since you use FOSS
resources for creating your piece, you are duty bound to give back the
changes you made *iff_you * distribute it to others. Please note that
the FOSS ideology does not work out economically with retail software.
FOSS earns big/mega bucks through support and customization.
Others may correct me if I am wrong, but if a developer uses FOSS and
modifies it for a customer/company, he is *not* bound to give out the
code, even to that customer, unless is demanded under the agreement made
between the 2 parties. But if he sells/distributes the modified code
openly to anyone, he is bound to reveal the modifications made.
Regards,
Rony.
___________________________________________________________
All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
--
http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
