Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

University Challenge (Announce)

posted by kerravon E-mail, Ligao, Free World North, 26.03.2022, 00:49

> > I didn't use the phrase "more competitive". Why
> > don't you quote something I actually said? I'm
> > not sure what that actually means.
>
> Well, here is what I mean: you are claiming that a BSD License or an MIT
> License will somehow prevent a piece of code from becoming the nucleus of a
> "Microsoft competitor",
I didn't say that either. I have no idea what
companies will pick up BSD license code and take
the risk that they will be sued by the undisputed
copyright holder.

I'm just saying that any company that I start won't,
and that's my target audience - people who want
genuinely free code, not Stallman's definition of
"free" that is as free as communist dictatorships
were.

> but if the code were public domain, then suddenly
> good things will magically happen and the code will magically become a
> "Microsoft competitor".
I didn't say that either. I have no idea what the
free market will do. It's beyond my control.

I can speak hypothetically about what *I* might do
if I started a company.

> > That is a problem with copyrighted freeware. What
> > I am interested in is a company picking up some
> > public domain code as a BASE, something that "mostly
> > works", and then taking ownership of it, making sure
> > it passes their own stringent tests (the sort of
> > effort you are alluding to with "paying back"), and
> > then commercially protecting that by making it closed
> > source, and stamping their own reputation on it.
>
> And what makes you so sure they would they do that?
I didn't claim to be so sure of that. It's the free
market. I have donated free code to the free market.
What happens after that I have no idea.

> No company decided to "take ownership" of the OpenSSL code. This, even
> though any one company could easily do so.
No, they can't "easily" do that. The code is
copyrighted so anyone who wants to make a
product out of it (commercial, closed source)
risks being sued by the copyright holder, who
very very clearly never relinquished copyright.

> Why do you expect that, if OpenSSL were public domain, then some company
> would magically decide to maintain it properly, rather than leaving the
> project in its under-funded state?
I don't "expect" that. I have no idea what to
expect because we have no data for what happens
when an SSL implementation is released to the
public domain.

> You are just engaging in hand-waving and wishful thinking here.
Either that or you are engaged in putting words into
my mouth.

> > "everyone" doesn't speak with one voice.
>
> You do not realize that this works both ways? Perhaps you should stop
> being enamoured with your own voice?
Pardon? All I did was say that there were multiple
opinions out there, so you can't talk about
"everyone". I am one of those people. I don't speak
for "everyone", I'm just giving you my opinion.

Perhaps instead you should stop trying to shut down
my opinion?

> Also, you seem to think the MIT License and the BSD Licenses
> are like "communism" — but a piece of code placed under a
> proprietary license is a sign of "reputation" and therefore
> Good™ and very "freedom".
I didn't make that claim either.

I have no opinion on what proprietary license any
particular company may choose to place on their
commercial product.

I only offered an opinion on what I would do if I
were a company looking for code to use as a base.

And I didn't tell you what license my company would
put on the final product, because I haven't consulted
my company lawyers yet because I haven't started my
company yet.

> Did I get you correct?
Nope.

BFN. Paul.

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22632 Postings in 2109 Threads, 402 registered users, 448 users online (0 registered, 448 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum