On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 04:45:34AM -0400, Chris Faherty wrote:
> On 24-Oct-2000 Brian Mathis wrote:
>
> > The fact is that people need to sell and protect thier software. This
> > will never change. OSS and PayForPlay software will always exist. The
> > relative merits of each scheme is beyond the scope of this thread.
>
> Selling software as PayForPlay is such a 20th Century concept.
Actually it is a pre-Gutenberg concept when duplication meant years in
a scriptorium.
The economic terms are changing since the cost of distribution is
tending toward zero, so the content can't hide within.
> I have no problem with releasing sources under GPL, and in certain cases
> where the code just isn't substantial releasing it into public domain. The
> way I see it, it just invites opportunity and gives me exposure in a way
> which fits into the "big picture." After all, releasing under GPL et al
> doesn't prevent the copyright holders from licensing differently in the
> future.
www.opensource.org describes several licenses, and I've used each in
different cases depending on what I wanted to do.
--
For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see
http://www.palmos.com/dev/tech/support/forums/
