Gustavo, you just don't understand the sublime complex logic.
Let me paraphrase it for you and maybe you'll see the BSD light:
I want you to change your code to be under the BSD license
so that I have the legal ability to copy all or part of it in my work,
or to extend it in significant ways and use that in my work, and
be able to keep all your original code or my changes to it hidden
from everyone.
But don't worry, I intend to give code back for everyone to use!
and even donate money back to you once I'm financially successful!!
Lots of companies will do this, and hence, E-BSD will flourish!
Get it?!
---------- Original Message ----------
From: Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri <barbi...@gmail.com>
To: Enlightenment developer list <enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [E-devel] Why is Eina licensed under LGPL instead of BSD?
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 22:06:27 -0200
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Andrew F <andrewfriedman...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have to agree with David's post.
> We chose you over other options because of the BSD license. It gave us
> legal protections we could no get with LGPL.
>
> BSD Allows start ups to raise funds. Why? because investors are not going
> to fund a company that can't protects its code.
> Remember there is no legal ambiguity with the BSD license and plenty with
> the LGPL. And Legal ambiguity is the kiss of death for investors.
>
> With success, funds can be donated back to the base project when using a
> BSD license.
this is the most full of bullshit email I've read in years. Please
check reality, nowadays funds are not raised based on code anymore
ehehehhee... are you stuck into the 90's? Given most of today's
startups are not even offering binaries of their code to others,
because the bulk of intelligence runs on servers, this is irrelevant
(unless you use Affero GPL). Then code for mobiles (where you send
people binaries) are in a completely new platform/language and in this
case EFL is irrelevant as well... so let's cut this bullshit.
not to say I doubt I'll live to the day that we find a good soul that
got money from investors and is allowed to contribute it in decent
amounts to an opensource project. If you have investors they will keep
the money to the essentials to bring product to masses and then
profit, we "the community" will stay there hoping for something that
never happens.
> To be honest... I think you cut your nuts off. You could have focused on
> marketing your
> professional consulting services or development services and raised funds
> that way.
oh really? but guess what, bsd hurts that. It's tons of times easier
to do if it's lgpl. I _DID_ that, I had a company doing exact that,
then it was so successful we were booked by major companies, to the
point Intel acquired it :-D
seriously, if I had bsd I had nothing. As a service provider the
product belongs to the client (unless you convince them to pay
something that will belong to you) and you can't force them to give
back nothing. with lgpl you can force them to, at least, give back the
changes to infrastructure (efl, kernel, ...) and you then use this
better technology to provide new customer with better base and deliver
new services.
> You could also have modified the licensee or added a commercial license.
> QT seems to be doing very well.
you're definitely stuck into the 90s.
> You could have also been genuine and simply asked for financial
> assistance. You could have had fund raisers, on line or in person.
> BSD unix makes it annual budget with on-line fund raising.
WAT?
> And when I say give back after the fact, its not lip service. Not only did
> we intend to give back to e17/e18/3x but
> we have budgeted for it. In fact we have added LINE ITEMS on our budget to
> cover quarterly donations for open source code that we use.
>
> And it makes scene for us. Open source developers develop the base product
> and we put a functional and good looking wrapper on it for end
> users. Open source teams do what they do well, which is develop core
> technologies, and we do what we do well, sell and market.
> ( and build functional and good looking wrappers)
oh dear, different universe? Look there, the originator of that
license.. the super-successful BSD! It managed to be the most
successful server OS, then got every other OS from the embedded... but
not. BSD were closer to achieve success in server (FreeBSD) and
embedded (NetBSD) than Linux, but their license (and developer mindset
-- I'd add) brought then to the current situation. The "most
successful" BSD out there is Darwin, that diverged from public years
(decade?) ago... then a company may do something, and the community is
still hoping for something back (money, technology).
> So, what do we do now? Find a new desktop? But we have been working on
> e17 /e18
> for a while.... Our second choice was QT as they have a commercial
> license.
>
> On top of finding a new desktop, now I have to adjust our budgets. I have
> to take out a line item.
> Not a happy camper.
What are you talking about? Define "our budget" and "we have"... This
happened in 2008, why are you saying this in 2014? E17/18,
Elementary... ALL were released in that state, depending on LGPL.
____________________________________________________________
How to Sleep Like a Rock
Obey this one natural trick to fall asleep and stay asleep all night.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/52e30b8e7c2e0b8e38fbst02duc
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
