> Alain: We may want to put restrictions on the uses
> of OpenKard and its derivatives, though. For
example,
> do we allow the hypothetical company that we will
name
> MicroSloth to make just enough modifications to our
> source code (e.g. a fork) and scoop our entire
> effort, and make a bundle with it?
Anthony: ... Microsoft ...
Alain: No .. no .. I am writing about a hypothetical
company called MicroSloth but you got the right idea.
BIG company, with tremendous financial and technical
means at their disposal, a well-established business
network, lots of clients (most of which don't give a
hoot for Open Source).
Anthony: So what if MicroSloth sells it?
Alain: Let's be clear that the issue is whether
OpenKard derivatives (forks) can fork commercially or
whether it is in our best interest to insist in
writing that OpenKard derivatives must remain free and
open, like GPL does. That licencing-restriction would
prevent MicroSloth from turning their fork into
something non-free, non-open, proprietary.
Anthony: Just imagine what that does for the usage
base.
Alain: OUR usage-base would drop to (or remain at) the
number of people that form this group. How could we
directly compete with MicroSloth when they have the
same starting point as us (where OpenKard is
concerned) but they have everything else (e.g.
financial, technical, business, etc). They will leave
us so far behind in the dust that we will become
irrelevant.
Anthony: If you're selling stacks, you'll be QUITE
happy.
Alain: I guess so, but is that really what you want
our group to become? Small component and/or
content-provider minions working for some Goliath and
hoping that some of His unsatisfied clients will buy
something from us, until such time that Goliath takes
notice and gobbles-up those opportunities (crumbs) as well.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
