Henry, I don't question your interpretation of the contracts, but suspect that there are other interpretations I wouldn't question either. ;)
My point was that if the reseller is adding value to an open source item by creating the installation package, or in whatever way, then I don't see where it's wrong for them to charge for the value they've actually created. Of course, it _would_ be wrong for them to foist off appropriate support onto people who did not participate in the profit, but that's a different issue ... a matter of stealing. Once the lawyerly stuff is put aside, isn't the matter that simple? Bill > From: Henri Yandell <bayard at generationjava.com> > Reply-To: macgroup at erdos.math.louisville.edu > Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 13:06:35 -0400 (EDT) > To: macgroup at erdos.math.louisville.edu > Subject: Re: MacGroup: Processor temp and cron job - can't finds > > > > On Tue, 4 May 2004, Bill Holt wrote: > >> Thanks Jerry, >> >> I don't understand why anyone would object to these people selling a >> compiled, easy-install version of an OS program. > > [a kind of round about answer to why people would object, with hopefully > lots of explaining for anyone else listening] > > The GPL exists to stop companies making money from open-source without it > helping the open-source world out. Basically if you 'distribute' a change > to a GPL program, you have to GPL your code. > > LGPL exists to allow people to 'distribute' code that does not change or > add to an LGPL program but merely reuses it in its intended form. LGPL is > a bit frowned on my the GPL creators nowadays and really exists as a > marketing scheme to make it easier for GPL code to conquer areas dominated > by proprietary programs. LGPL's wording is a bit too close to the C > computer language and so can get quite technical to decide if you're > obeying it. > > The other side of the dice in the open source world is the BSD type of > licence. This is more open and basically just says that if you do > something with our code, make sure you mention we did it and don't try to > sell it off as our code or somehow supported by us. OS X sits on top of > a FreeBSD-clone and uses this licence. Microsofts TCP program was also a > clone of a BSD-licenced program at one point. The Apache web server is > probably the most well known of the BSD licenced things. > > So the general gist in open source is that it's fine to resell the code I > wrote as long as you mention that I was involved and don't make any > promises on my behalf. The GPL addition is that if you change my code and > let people use it, I have full rights to it and can add it to my code. > > The legal question in this case is whether wrapping a command line tool in > a GUI is a change to my code. If the download contained my code, then the > answer is usually yes and the GPL applies. > > Hen > > > > | The next meeting of the Louisville Computer Society will > | be May 25. The LCS Web page is <http://www.kymac.org>. > | List posting address: <mailto:macgroup at erdos.math.louisville.edu> > | List Web page: <http://erdos.math.louisville.edu/macgroup> > | The next meeting of the Louisville Computer Society will | be May 25. The LCS Web page is <http://www.kymac.org>. | List posting address: <mailto:macgroup at erdos.math.louisville.edu> | List Web page: <http://erdos.math.louisville.edu/macgroup>
