Hi - If Oracle or IBM thought they had any additional advantage with Apache OpenOffice development then the history of this project would differ.
Regards, Dave Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 13, 2017, at 3:55 PM, Peter Kovacs <legi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 12.01.2017 11:00, Pedro wrote: >> Hi Peter >> >>> If your model works directly with the Product, the flexibility of the >>> Permissive license can be the stronger choice. >>> I do not believe that a lot of people understand this. >> >> Can you elaborate on this point? I don't really see how using a copyleftless >> license is better when your business "works directly with the Product". >> >> I see it as altruistic (like copyleft is communistic) but as a business >> model, I really don't see how it is a "stronger choice". Using a >> copyleftless license allows anyone else to build exactly the same product. > Never forget, all of this is a mind game. IF you fear something or feel > confident it is mostly based on your own weighting of arguments. > > I assumed that if you work with a Product, then not all is released. Parts of > it, are closed, and therefore individual, but share a common base with other > competitors. > This can drop production/development cost or can shortcut knowledge original > did not available. > > I can not imagin that you can directly earn from a Product if you only have > copy left license model. Some do, but this is only working if all other > commiters more or less donate to the cause. > Or you have a complex method on lesser and full copy left structure. Which > can results in issue over time, if something that develops differently then > you have planned. > > The risk over time, is on Permissive licence lower. Also if this is viable > option, you can always retreat from the project without loosing your invest. > > For us it means that Oracle, IBM can always start to market their own Product > without the need to return something towards Open Office. From Oracles or IBM > position this is a strong one. > However I do not believe that the community is at the same time in a weaker > position, because Open Source is in my eyes not bound to market or earning > strategy. Unlike companies we can take time. > You see that on the LO vs. OO discussion. Most of the LO argument are market > based one. If you think outside the market its all not an issue. What > Reamains is the strength of Open source as such. > In my eyes we are in a super strong position, as long as we have a commiter > base that work for the greater good. And I am very convinced on the Open > Office future. > >> Regards, >> Pedro > my best regards > Peter > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
