Peter: > What you *could* do, however, is to create a per-CPU support contract > *without* delivering the software. Or make two contracts of it: one > for delivering the software under GPL terms, and a per-CPU support > contract.
What my support contract *may not* do, if the GPL means anything at all, is assert that merely by copying and installing a GPLed program I have somehow used the support provider's services. Whatever one *could* do, I would not suggest really creating a per-CPU support contract because how could it possibly be enforced? When you get an issue report from a support customer, how do you know (and why do you care) on which machine the issue arose? Rather, support should be sold like a metered utility (like electricity): You can pay simply for actual usage. The provider only has to guarantee a supply up to a certain amount. If you are worried that you'll have spike demands that exceed the default, you can pay a retainer fee in return for which the support provider guarantees you a higher level of potential "issues per minute". To sweeten the pot, the provider could make promises such as that under-utilized retainer fees are, in part, redirected to making general improvements to software or to R&D. -t _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
