Hi This is regarding the digressed thread of "Where is the Community" and the many different elements of disucssion.
Here are some replies Ram wrote : >Call is social responsibility, call it a *"request from the community"* > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote >>Sounds more like dictating a social *duty*. with rights there are responsibilities or duties. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote >>So what is this antagonism towards people making money or people with >>wealth >>who are using this software? Why do we care? As long as the community >>keeps >>getting better and better over time, we have accomplished what we have >>to. >>When you use words like "responsibility" or "giving back", you *are* >>talking >>about strings attached to using Free software. If there are such >>strings, put >>them in the damn licence, otherwise nobody has the right to interpret >>the >>licence or its "spirit", whether they are Free or closed source >>software Thanks , I will remember that the various open source / free software licenses (GPL ASF etc) does not say anything about *any community* hence there are no expectations from the community or its members hence no *duties*. And won't interpret more than what the license of any free / libre software gives / allows. And When I do have the opportunity to release software under a Free Software License will remember to incorporate some aspects of community. >>>So what is this antagonism towards people making money or people with >>>wealth >>>who are using this software? Why do we care? As long as the community >>>keeps >>>getting better and better over time, we have accomplished what we >>>have to. Raj Mathur Wrote >>>I agree with Sandip: making money from FOSS is perfectly legitimate >>>(dammit, I do it myself!), and you cannot ask the user of a software >>>for anything beyond what the software license enjoins him/her to do. No antagonism at all. This is what I said where the community is the large amorphous mass (whose collective resources base is large but individual resource base disparately distributed) and the corporate are the proprietory privateers (who have even larger private and unshared resources) whose sole motive is profit, wherever it may come from and *whatever the cost*. The key words are "whatever the cost" and that cost to me is freedom to choose my software and freedom to enable other to choose theirs. ams wrote: >>>Now I'm confused. >>>At 2005-09-24 12:39:26 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> There is that cliched statement of freedom - "ones freedom ends when >>> it begins to affect anothers" [...] >>> they are not (rather should not be) free to choose to *not contribute* >>Why not? And what are you saying they should contribute, exactly? >>And how do their decisions in this regard affect your own freedom? -- ams Contribute to enabling others to make the same free choices. It takes a kind of supportive enviroment to enable people to make a choice - so the beneficiaries of the free software movement community have a responsibility to make that opportunity available to others. Thats the contribution I am trying to highlight which appears in this copyleft statement. *copyleft (very simply stated) is the rule that when redistributing the program, you cannot add restrictions to deny other people the central freedoms.* http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html By not participating in creating that enabling environment is actually turning a blind eye to the issue of access to choice , access to free software and in this context freedom. I am not sure if freedom comes with out duty or responsibility. I question what kind of freedom it is that does not at the very least ask of its beneficiaries to make sure others get what they have got, that is freedom to ensure everyone has the same playing field . the same free state. As a consequence of this discussion I read some of the popular Free Software licenses none of them have anything to say about communities and contribunting back to the community. The closest to community license was this: Licensing Community Server There are 3 options for licensing Community Server: * Community license The Community license provides a free version of Community Server that can easily be upgraded to a commercial license. The Community license is perfect for non-profit or non-commercial applications. The Community license can be used in commercial applications as long as the license agreement is adhered to. The following are drawn from GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, June 1991 "To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights. These restrictions translate to *certain responsibilities* for you if you distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it." "The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions of the General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will be similar *in spirit* to the present version, but may differ in detail to address new problems or concerns." "Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope." GPL *************** One place where the word Community is used in cojunction with License Community License The community license allows for the use of a fully functional free version of Community Server. However, this version does have restrictions, some features disabled or removed, and requires the display of the EULA.gif on every displayed web page that is using functionality provided by Community Server. This EULA.gif must also link back to www.communityserver.org. Below is the EULA.gif image: The Community license is recommended for individuals or organizations that need the functionality offered by Community Server, want to learn the source code, or simply want to ‘try before you buy’. The Community licensed version is a fully supported version of the product and you can purchase support or other add-ons. However, no direct support is provided for the Community licensed version without a support/maintenance agreement with Telligent Systems. The intent of the Community license is in exchange for running a free version of the software licensees will help raise awareness and interest in the Community Server platform. A secondary goal is to discourage code forking or derivative versions and to encourage participating at www.communityserver.org to help drive new features and functionality. ******* Some of the licenses and sites I checked out to figure out the community aspect were here: http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/ http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html http://opensource.org/licenses/osl-2.1.php http://opensource.org/licenses/afl-2.1.txt http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ecl1.txt http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/fullrights http://www.google.com/search?q=community+license&btnG=Google+Search+opensource.org ****** My guess is that the contents of this discussion have digressed far way from the original "Where is the Community" but it has been encouraged me to actually read the various Open Source / Free Licenses and figure out , in conjunction with the various comments' terminology being used and the direction licenses are taking and the community aspect as well. regards ram _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/ Event: Freedel 2005, 17th & 18th September, 2005 - http://freedel.in
