On Monday 30 Jun 2008, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote: > On 29-Jun-08, at 7:44 AM, Raj Mathur wrote: > [snip] > > Some licences like the GPL force you to provide source code for a > > nominal fee along with binaries at the user's request; > > I thought all OSI licenses force you to do this
Once again, you need a competent lawyer to show you how various FOSS licences differ from each other. Some, like the GPL, force distribution of source when you distribute binaries. Others like BSD permit you to give and/or sell binaries made from FOSS source without any obligation to provide the source. > > however, that > > nominal fee applies to the source code, not to the binaries -- > > there is > > no limit on how much you can charge for the binaries. > > > > In short, not being able to sell FOSS is a limitation of the market > > (no > > one wants to buy it), rather than some intrinsic limitation in FOSS > > itself. > > I would tend to the opinion that sale of any software, let alone FOSS > is illegal, immoral and an act of cheating - the only point is, that > the courts have to recognise this. So are you OK with giving proprietary software away for free? Should we be commending MS for making IE available for download for free? If someone wants to buy a FOSS package it is perfectly legal and, IMO, moral to sell it to her. After all, the package remains doesn't become proprietary by the mere fact of sale -- it remains FOSS. I believe that proprietary (close source) software it unethical and immoral. Not being a communist, I don't believe that just selling software is immoral or unethical. As long as the software remains open you are welcome to make money from in in any way you desire short of making it proprietary. You can give away free copies of proprietary software As for legality, I would only like to quote some statements from the GNU General Public Licence v2.0: <quote> When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. </quote> <quote> ...if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee... </quote> <quote> You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee. </quote> If RMS and all of FSF is satisfied with expressly permitting charging money to distribute FOSS, I'm satisfied that it's legal and ethical. In short: Proprietary software is not the same as commercial software. Regards, -- Raju -- Raj Mathur [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kandalaya.org/ GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F PsyTrance & Chill: http://schizoid.in/ || It is the mind that moves _______________________________________________ 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/
