Re: [ilugd] [OT] Difference between cross-post and multi-post

2008-06-30 Thread आशीष शुक्ल Ashish Shukla
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

,--[ On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 09:58:31AM +0530, shirish wrote:
| Hi all,
|  Another thing I know both the articles are written from usenet
| perspectives. From what little I know usenet are the forefathers of
| modern mailing lists, so the above should apply to mailing lists as
| well I guess.

Cross-posting and multi-posting make difference in newsgroup posting. I
don't know how they're relevant in terms of mailing list.

If you post a message to multiple newsgroups, by mentioning multiple newsgroups
separated by commas, in 'Newsgroups' header, this is cross-posting.
There is a 'Followup-To' header, where you specify, on which newsgroup,
you want follow-ups to the posting.

If you post a single message to multiple newsgroups, by creating separate 
postings,
this is multi-posting.

In case of cross-posting, only single message is submitted, which will
show up in all posted newsgroups. If you've already read that message in one 
newsgroup, it'll be marked as _read_ for you by your NUA (news user agent),
so if you came across that message in other newsgroups also, that message
will already marked as _read_ .

The cross-posting won't have desired effect (similar to newsgroups) in case of
mailing lists, as these mailing lists operate in a different way from
newsgroups. Although the only benefit with cross-posting in terms of mailing 
lists is
that you get messages from different lists with same 'Message-ID' header. It 
depends
on your MUA to figure out that whether these messages are cross-postings
or not.

HTH
- -- 
·-- ·-  ·--- ·- ···- ·- ·--·-· --· -- ·- ·· ·-·· ·-·-·- -·-· --- --
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkhonXwACgkQHy+EEHYuXnTTlACeO1jTxDPB7Y1k/tNREYg5dDD3
A0QAoKDrcYUcQXGbKHT35TjB/ChmqIlu
=7eDU
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Raj Mathur
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Dinesh Shah
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves  wrote:
 ultimately law is made by the supreme court. There is no such thing
 as 'settled law', laws are always subject to change - just needs a
 larger bench of the supreme court to do so. And when the court looks
 at any law, they look at the written law as well as such things as
 natural justice, equity, interests of the state, interests of the
 public in general and then they pronounce on the law.

err... When have our honorable courts have become law makers? Any and
all courts only help the interpretation of law laid down by our
(dis?)honorable law makers namely - parliament and legislative
counciles of states.

 --
 regards

 Kenneth Gonsalves
 Associate, NRC-FOSS
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://nrcfosshelpline.in/code/

With regards,
-- 
--Dinesh Shah :-)
Shah Micro System
-- 
Dan Quayle  - It's time for the human race to enter the solar system.

___
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Kenneth Gonsalves

On 30-Jun-08, at 3:49 PM, Dinesh Shah wrote:

 On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves  wrote:
 ultimately law is made by the supreme court. There is no such thing
 as 'settled law', laws are always subject to change - just needs a
 larger bench of the supreme court to do so. And when the court looks
 at any law, they look at the written law as well as such things as
 natural justice, equity, interests of the state, interests of the
 public in general and then they pronounce on the law.

 err... When have our honorable courts have become law makers? Any and
 all courts only help the interpretation of law laid down by our
 (dis?)honorable law makers namely - parliament and legislative
 counciles of states.

law comes from:
1. tradition or custom (common law)
2. Parliament and legislative assemblies
3. Ordinances from the executive branch
4. Judgements of the high courts and supreme court

but ultimately the final arbiter and hence lawmaker is the supreme  
court (note the word ultimately in the quote).


-- 
regards

Kenneth Gonsalves
Associate, NRC-FOSS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/code/





___
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Kenneth Gonsalves

On 30-Jun-08, at 3:39 PM, Raj Mathur wrote:

 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.

question is: when you 'sell' FOSS do you charge VAT or do you charge  
service tax. We recently 'bought' a FOSS package for 3 lakhs. We were  
charged service tax to the tune of 36,000. If we had 'bought' a  
proprietary package we would have paid sales tax at 4% or 12,000. (at  
that time there was no VAT in tamilnadu).


-- 
regards

Kenneth Gonsalves
Associate, NRC-FOSS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/code/





___
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Sandip Bhattacharya
+++ Kenneth Gonsalves [30/06/08 14:11 +0530]:

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.


According to all FOSS licences, the software itself need not be
available to be downloadable to public - only to the customer (You can't 
restrain your
customers from distributing it though) But the essence being that all
the rights the licences talk about, are that of the paying customer.

If that is the case, why cannot one sell software with source along
with all the other freedoms given by the licence? What is immoral about
it? When you are using the term 'immoral', you mean it is the violation
of certain principles/intent of the licence. What violation do you see
here?

- Sandip

-- 
Sandip Bhattacharya
http://blog.sandipb.net

___
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Anand Shankar
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 question is: when you 'sell' FOSS do you charge VAT or do you charge
 service tax. We recently 'bought' a FOSS package for 3 lakhs. We were
 charged service tax to the tune of 36,000. If we had 'bought' a
 proprietary package we would have paid sales tax at 4% or 12,000. (at
 that time there was no VAT in tamilnadu).


 --
 regards

 Kenneth Gonsalves


DGSD (Directorate General of Supplies and Disposal, Government of
India) has a rate contract for Redhat Enterprise Linux and Suse
Enterprise Linux.

If the above two are considered FOSS, as per the terms and conditions,
the prices mentioned are inclusive of CST / 4% VAT.

I believe the two are FOSS. And as per the GoI contract document, it
is VAT instead of Service Tax!! If you were to emphasis interpret
more closely /emphasis, it means most Government Departments are
ending up buying FOSS, and that too as a Proprietary Software!!! In
fact, it seems it is easier for the seller to propose them as
Proprietary Software, and buyer to ask the seller saying that it is a
Proprietary Software, to facilitate easy purchase within his
organisation. All for the Government records!!! Moreover I am not sure
how many purchase officers can tell the difference between the two and
how.



anand

___
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Kenneth Gonsalves

On 30-Jun-08, at 6:05 PM, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:


 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.


 According to all FOSS licences, the software itself need not be
 available to be downloadable to public - only to the customer (You  
 can't restrain your
 customers from distributing it though) But the essence being that all
 the rights the licences talk about, are that of the paying customer.

 If that is the case, why cannot one sell software with source along
 with all the other freedoms given by the licence? What is immoral  
 about
 it? When you are using the term 'immoral', you mean it is the  
 violation
 of certain principles/intent of the licence. What violation do you see
 here?

software is knowledge. Knowledge cannot be bought or sold. It can  
only be shared.


-- 
regards

Kenneth Gonsalves
Associate, NRC-FOSS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/code/





___
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Kenneth Gonsalves

On 30-Jun-08, at 6:10 PM, Anand Shankar wrote:

 I believe the two are FOSS. And as per the GoI contract document, it
 is VAT instead of Service Tax!! If you were to emphasis interpret
 more closely /emphasis, it means most Government Departments are
 ending up buying FOSS, and that too as a Proprietary Software!!! In
 fact, it seems it is easier for the seller to propose them as
 Proprietary Software, and buyer to ask the seller saying that it is a
 Proprietary Software, to facilitate easy purchase within his
 organisation. All for the Government records!!! Moreover I am not sure
 how many purchase officers can tell the difference between the two and
 how.

I have just mailed the people who are charging service tax -  
interesting to see what their response is. After all if foss is a  
product that can be bought and sold, why should they charge extra?  
Interestingly enough, I am unable to find in the lists of FOSS  
business models any mention of a business model of selling FOSS as a  
product. But I suppose in view of the results of this debate, this  
will change.


-- 
regards

Kenneth Gonsalves
Associate, NRC-FOSS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/code/





___
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Sandip Bhattacharya
+++ Kenneth Gonsalves [30/06/08 20:41 +0530]:

software is knowledge. Knowledge cannot be bought or sold. It can  
only be shared.


And you would gladly share for a neat sum of money?

In the Gurukul system, knowledge was gladly shared for next to nothing.

- Sandip

-- 
Sandip Bhattacharya
http://blog.sandipb.net

___
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Jasbir Khehra
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:41:22 +0530
Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 On 30-Jun-08, at 6:05 PM, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
[snip]
 
 software is knowledge. Knowledge cannot be bought or sold. It can  
 only be shared.
 
Bought any books lately?

___
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Kenneth Gonsalves

On 30-Jun-08, at 9:42 PM, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:


 software is knowledge. Knowledge cannot be bought or sold. It can
 only be shared.


 And you would gladly share for a neat sum of money?

 In the Gurukul system, knowledge was gladly shared for next to  
 nothing.

quote
If I have an idli and I give the idli to you, you have an idli and I  
don't. So you compensate me with something worth an idli. If I have  
knowledge and I give the knowledge to you, we both have knowledge, so  
compensation is limited to the effort I spent in giving you the  
knowledge.
/quote

This is the best ever definition I have seen of FOSS.


-- 
regards

Kenneth Gonsalves
Associate, NRC-FOSS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/code/





___
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/


Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread Kenneth Gonsalves

On 30-Jun-08, at 9:46 PM, Jasbir Khehra wrote:

 Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 On 30-Jun-08, at 6:05 PM, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
 [snip]

 software is knowledge. Knowledge cannot be bought or sold. It can
 only be shared.

 Bought any books lately?

yes - bought two, one on blender and one on django. Strangely enough,  
both books are available on the net for free download. Yet I forked  
out a total 49 euro for one and 39 usd for the other. The sharer of  
knowledge is entitled to be compensated for the cost of sharing. Note  
that if I had downloaded it, he would not have got that compensation.  
But since I prefer dead tree based material to digital stuff I gladly  
paid my contribution towards the work he did to document and  
communicate his knowledge and the money spent to inscribe this on  
dead trees.

I also bought several books of fiction which are another type of  
thing altogether.


-- 
regards

Kenneth Gonsalves
Associate, NRC-FOSS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/code/





___
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/


Re: [ilugd] how Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin

2008-06-30 Thread shirish
Replies in-line

 Message: 6
 Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 05:27:54 + (UTC)
 From: PJ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [ilugd] Bill Gates got Windows 1.0 source-code from
trash-bin
 To: ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

 shirish [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


  First of all sorry for cross-posting the same query on so many lists.

 So don't do that then. It irritates people and gets you bad karma.

  I read somewhere couple of days ago that Bill Gates actually got his
 source-code from some trash-bin

 It's distorted in the telling.

 I don't remember the website [snip excuses]

 I posted about it on this mailing list too a while ago, I think.

 I'd skip out on athletics and go down to this computer center. We were moving
 ahead very rapidly: Basic, FORTRAN, LISP, PDP-10 machine language, digging out
 the operating system listings from the trash and studying those.

  - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/06/29/bill_gates_roots/

I posted couple of more links after I got feedback. This was the
original post which I had read and then forgotten

http://www.dhanapalan.com/blog/2008/06/22/bill-gates-and-the-importance-of-source-code/

and another one which I got from here

http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS_1.html

I thank you for the additional link.
 PJ





 --

 Message: 7
 Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:16:52 +0530
 From:  ? Ashish Shukla  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [ilugd] [OT] Difference between cross-post and multi-post
 To: The Linux-Delhi mailing list ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; x-action=pgp-signed

 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA1

 ,--[ On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 09:58:31AM +0530, shirish wrote:
 | Hi all,
 |  Another thing I know both the articles are written from usenet
 | perspectives. From what little I know usenet are the forefathers of
 | modern mailing lists, so the above should apply to mailing lists as
 | well I guess.

 Cross-posting and multi-posting make difference in newsgroup posting. I
 don't know how they're relevant in terms of mailing list.

 If you post a message to multiple newsgroups, by mentioning multiple 
 newsgroups
 separated by commas, in 'Newsgroups' header, this is cross-posting.
 There is a 'Followup-To' header, where you specify, on which newsgroup,
 you want follow-ups to the posting.

 If you post a single message to multiple newsgroups, by creating separate 
 postings,
 this is multi-posting.

 In case of cross-posting, only single message is submitted, which will
 show up in all posted newsgroups. If you've already read that message in one
 newsgroup, it'll be marked as _read_ for you by your NUA (news user agent),
 so if you came across that message in other newsgroups also, that message
 will already marked as _read_ .

 The cross-posting won't have desired effect (similar to newsgroups) in case of
 mailing lists, as these mailing lists operate in a different way from
 newsgroups. Although the only benefit with cross-posting in terms of mailing 
 lists is
 that you get messages from different lists with same 'Message-ID' header. It 
 depends
 on your MUA to figure out that whether these messages are cross-postings
 or not.

 HTH
 - --
 ?-- ?-  ?--- ?- ???- ?- ?--?-? --? -- ?- ?? ?-?? ?-?-?- -?-? --- --
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
 Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

 iEYEARECAAYFAkhonXwACgkQHy+EEHYuXnTTlACeO1jTxDPB7Y1k/tNREYg5dDD3
 A0QAoKDrcYUcQXGbKHT35TjB/ChmqIlu
 =7eDU
 -END PGP SIGNATURE-



 --

 Message: 8
 Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:11:17 +0530
 From: Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [ilugd] FOSS: VAT or service tax [was] Bill Gates got
Windows 1.0 source-code from trash-bin
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],   The Linux-Delhi mailing list
ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed


 On 29-Jun-08, at 7:44 AM, Raj Mathur wrote:

 and when you finally find a buyer for that bridge across the Yamuna
 don't forget to add octroi and VAT

 If you don't believe me, I'd suggest you get some competent lawyer to
 read the various licences at opensource.org and explain to you how
 none
 of them prevents you from selling the software.

 if you are talking law, you would know that interpretation of
 statutes (and licenses, contracts etc) does not depend on the mere
 letter of the law. So by just examining the licenses, no lawyer,
 competent or not can give an opinion on this.

 there are two types of competent lawyers:

 1. Those who look at the laws and court rulings and tell you what can
 be done within the confines of these laws

 2. Those who look beyond what is written and work to create/develop
 the law on the relevant subject

 ultimately law is made by the supreme court. There is no such thing
 as 'settled