At 10:03 -0400 10/1/02, Rogers Cadenhead wrote: >On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 17:51:48 -0400, Doug Meerschaert wrote: >>The OGF was created to transform the industry (or, at least, D&D) >>into an open-gaming model. Free commercial re-use is integral to >>this purpose. > >True, but I don't know that I would declare a license "non-open" >because of a restriction against commercial reuse -- which is what >the OGF does on its open licenses summary page. > >The FSF does the same thing here for software licenses: > >http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html > >I guess I'm just fishing for a philosophical explanation about why >"for non-commercial use only" is a deal killer to open source.
at least one philosophy behind open source is "i give this away for anyone else to use, provided they give it away, too." IOW, so long as you abide by that very basic condition, anything goes. so, saying "you can make a commercial product, provided you still give it away, too" may practically amount to "no commercial products"--but it is philosophically very different. "non-commercial only" would make Redhat Linux and D20 products impossible. "gotta keep it open" allows both, by allowing them to sell a value-added product, and thus charge for it. another open-content philosophy is "i give this away for anyone else to use, and i make no restrictions, 'cause that's the whole point." this, likewise, doesn't accept non-commercial licenses. -- woodelf <*> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://webpages.charter.net/woodelph/ "Not many fishies, left in the sea. Not many fishies, just Londo and me" -- G'Kar _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
