The other thing I would do is to submit Skim to the App Store and have it
there for free, basically undermining any sales PDF Reader might get
through the App Store.
-Peter-
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Peter Rich <[email protected]> wrote:
> Patrik,
> I'm sorry, I didn't mean to accuse you of advocating this behavior, but
> I clearly did that. Sorry. I was trying to explain why people would feel
> slighted by what has happened. Mark A is right, the license is very open
> and liberal, and if that's not the intent of the original developers, it
> should be changed. I would also vote for a GPL license, as you have
> pointed out the flaws in what's there. As I stated in my original post,
> laws are needed where people refuse to regulate themselves. There is
> clearly a lack of decency in what this developer has done, and I seriously
> doubt the integrity of the few "good" comments in the App Store extolling
> the software, which only serves to further my suspicions.
>
> I'm also not suggesting we sit idly by. Though I rarely comment on this
> list, I follow the discussions and this one caught my attention. I
> immediately wrote to Apple, a company that itself is fighting what they see
> as unethical copying of their work. I also grabbed the software when it
> was free, so that I could comment and warn potential clients that they were
> about to pay for something they could get for free (and the free product is
> likely better in this case). Were I in the developer's shoes, I would find
> the part of the license that I think is being violated and ask Apple to
> force compliance on the "developer" of the PDF Reader in the App Store.
>
>
> -peter-
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Patrik Jonsson <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Peter Rich <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > The reason that so many of us find this "developer's" behavior to be
>> > despicable is that he clearly is trying to profit off of someone else's
>> > hard-earned work without so much as a nod to those who did the work.
>> Their
>> > reason for making the software "free" is so that it can be the best
>> software
>> > possible (that's my guess, anyhow), and anyone who wants to contribute
>> to
>> > its progress may do so. When this developer can't be bothered to so
>> much as
>> > change the graphic, it communicates that the evolution of the product
>> is not
>> > what's on his mind. It then becomes incumbent upon us to warn anyone
>> who
>> > would purchase such software that the developer has behaved
>> unscrupulously.
>> > If I suspected a developer had done next to nothing with a product s/he
>> is
>> > selling, I would run away quickly, as I would doubt any concerns or
>> support
>> > needs would be met, should they arise in the future.
>> >
>> > I find Patrik's comments to be both enlightening and problematic. They
>> are
>> > enlightening because it highlights that there are a lot of enterprising
>> > folks out there that don't believe there is a problem with such
>> behavior if
>> > the law allows it. Surprisingly, these people often make what many see
>> as
>> > "good" businessmen. This is problematic because it is exactly that
>> attitude
>> > that leads to the decline of civilization. Some believe their morals
>> need
>> > only go so far as what society deems to be ethical and puts into law.
>> That
>> > is a dangerous attitude because it suggest that we need to depend on
>> > government to regulate all our rights and wrongs. Laws are clearly
>> needed,
>> > as people's beliefs about what is right/wrong are going to differ, and
>> we
>> > need a clear protocol for how to operate in and regulate society so
>> people
>> > know what to expect and how to interact with each other. But if we go
>> no
>> > further in our treatment of each other, society quickly degenerates
>> into a
>> > "me-first" society. Laws are only needed to regulate people who refuse
>> to
>> > regulate themselves. I tell this to my children all the time. If they
>> > cannot control their temper toward each other, someone else will have to
>> > control it for them—and that just introduces restrictions, the opposite
>> of
>> > freedom.
>> >
>> > So, yes, Patrik, you are right; there are people who will take
>> advantage of
>> > others. In my experience living in 4 different countries, though, I
>> have
>> > seen entire societies that believe if you can take advantage of another
>> and
>> > you don't, then you are a fool. Funny thing is, those are the societies
>> > that I never see progress. They end up in a constant cycle of
>> corruption
>> > and the introduction of stricter laws and enforcement. Morality
>> transcends
>> > laws and leads to greater freedom. Abuse of trust leads to more
>> > restrictions and slows progress.
>>
>> Please be careful in what opinions you attribute to me. Nowhere did I
>> say that I agreed with this behavior. In fact, I think it's clearly on
>> the sleazy side even if he had complied with the license terms. What I
>> said was that it was not unexpected and not worth getting upset about.
>> People do things I disagree with all the time, behave as assholes when
>> driving, taking advantage of the situation, etc, but I have no control
>> over them and the only thing that happens if I get upset over it is
>> that I raise my blood pressure and heighten my stress level. Nothing
>> positive will happen. The same applies here. We take action to the
>> copyright violation, decide if the license should be changed, and move
>> on. (This is an appropriate place to insert a well-known XKCD link:
>> http://xkcd.com/386/)
>>
>> I also disagree with your opinion that people should be bound by the
>> feelings of the original authors. I'm not even close to libertarian,
>> but in this instance I agree with Stallman: Software is not free (as
>> in freedom) if the users are implicitly bound by whatever feelings the
>> original authors have (and when such feelings are not spelled out in
>> the license it's even impossible to expect that people should know
>> what they are).
>>
>> As for whether we want the license to be changed, I think a common
>> complaint from free software advocates is that the BSD license
>> *allows* redistribution without source and under different terms. This
>> exactly means that you can "profit off of someone else's hard-earned
>> work" in a completely different way compared to for example the GPL
>> where you can only redistribute the software under the same license.
>> For this reason, the software that I've put countless hours into is
>> GPL, precisely because while I want people to use it, I do not want
>> them to change the terms so that their enhancements will not benefit
>> others. For this reason, if there is a discussion about changing the
>> license, my vote is for the GPL.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> /Patrik
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
>> The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
>> is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
>> Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
>> _______________________________________________
>> Skim-app-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/skim-app-users
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Rich, PhD
> peter_rich [at] byu [dot] edu
> Instructional Psychology & Technology
> Brigham Young University
> Provo, Ut 84602
>
--
Peter Rich, PhD
peter_rich [at] byu [dot] edu
Instructional Psychology & Technology
Brigham Young University
Provo, Ut 84602
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
Skim-app-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/skim-app-users
