Hi Kaspar, On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Kaspar Schleiser <kas...@schleiser.de> wrote: > > > > As the man earning a shit load of money from one of these evil companies, > using a proprietary smart phone, and buying Facebook goggles, working on > RIOT for me is a very expensive hobby. > > I'm not sure I get your point, but if we want RIOT to have an impact similar to Linux, then RIOT cannot remain only a hobby, and RIOT has to involve companies and products. Else, RIOT will have no impact in the end.
BSDing turns it into work I do for other companies, for free. I will > probably not contribute much this way, unless I become one of the companies > taking RIOT and selling it somehow. > > I don't see how any company could "sell RIOT". RIOT is more a component of something "bigger" that is the actual business. So as a RIOT developer, it's not like there is no room to exploit this situation, should it occur. Isn't this win-win, essentially? The main point is: legal aspects of RIOT should not repel too many people/companies to build a business using RIOT as *part* of a system/service being sold. Else, there is no chance RIOT will remain relevant in the future. In my opinion, what we need is statements from legal departments from companies that are genuinely interested in RIOT technically. Is LGPLv2.1 a show stopper for them, or not? What is the main reason why? This is the key information the community should consider. Cheers, Emmanuel
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org http://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
