On Wednesday 19. February 2014 12.58.57 Agustin benito bethencourt wrote: > I must confess though that I am worry about the association between: > * proprietary platforms = commercial > * free platforms = non commercial > > that might be implied from this model. > > But the business models is a discussion that we need to solve within KDE.
To be frank, I could not disagree more. The open source as well as the free-software movements are about freedom, and I believe KDE supports that as well. The beliefs of freedom are not at all hurt by someone taking that FLOSS and packaging it for a fee. There is no incompatibility there. Or, specifically, any commercial activity people do with free software, provided they honor the licenses, should never be a problem. KDE is not about socialism. Commercial actions are specifically allowed by our licenses and I feel its a bridge too far to even imply that its KDE that can have a say about how a person asks for compensation of his/her time. Practically speaking, the concept of filling the void of good Windows packages is something that is open to economic markets (i.e. Capitalism). With a severe shortage of people doing the work, there is an opportunity for those that want to do it for a price. Its economy 101, everyone benefits when this is allowed by default. Forbid commercial activity and certain things just won't get done. I believe even hinting that KDE should manage business models or commercial incentives on using Free Software is bound to kill that. -- Thomas _______________________________________________ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
