>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.
Alain, Anthony,
this is exactly what I'm thinking about, too; I don't mind people selling
products created *with* OpenCard, and I don't mind other open-source
OpenCards popping up. What I *do* mind if someone sells OpenCard without
acknowledging that there's this open source version of it, and people who
try to sell the sources making lots of money from others' work.
However, I don't mind people earning money by DLing OC and saving it on a
CD-Rom or things like that, as long as the price charged is proportional to
the work they did. That is, selling a CD-ROM for $40 is still acceptable,
but charging $1000 for an OpenCard distribution should be illegal.
However, it's a blurry line between selling your own product and selling
OpenCard. That's why I'd say if people advertise "includes OpenCard" or the
likes, they are selling OpenCard, while a simple logo "realized using
OpenCard" means they're selling a product created using OC.
Cheers,
-- M. Uli Kusterer
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.weblayout.com/witness
'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...'
--- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: ---
Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html
Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
