Re: [videoblogging] Re: Licensing
There is a contradiction in the GPL inasmuch as it prevents people from restricting the freedom of others. (Just as laws against slavery impinge upon the freedom of slave owners.) Nevertheless, those that desire a freer freedom can pick the BSD license, which permits the software to be incorporated in unfree systems. This is how Microsoft Windows contains TCP/IP code from BSD unix. Enric wrote: This may start a whole discussion back and forth. But, I find a problem with the philosophy and idea behind fully GPL and free software. As Richard Stallman posits freedom, it's the freedom of anyone to use software without restriction or barriers. The contradiction I find is that is that is purely accomplished by compelling those that create software to release all the code. So there is a contradiction in the word freedom in that it is taking away freedom of choice from those that create the work. I see the best result is a wide inclusion of those producing open source and mixed open and closed source products. That way a wide range of products and perspectives produce a rich, valuable source of software. -- Enric
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Licensing
I think vPIP is an awesome plug-in. I'm glad we get to ship it / promote it / teach people how to use it with Show in a Box. I respect Enric's desire to not offer everything as GPL. Especially since he is working on his flash player to make it fabulous, and since the use of flash players by media companies big and small is a HUGE thing, that has to do with $$$ flowing... I respect Enric's plan, whatever it might be, to be able to charge people for use in the future / or whatever (I don't know what) but to not simply give everything away as GPL. We definitely need to work out the licensing issues around all the parts of SIAB. It's on the long list of things to do -- but no one has gotten to it with the focus and rigor needed to finish answering all the questions and teach everyone else what's up. I, for example, barely know what all the different terms mean -- and could easily use the wrong one when talking. This issue does keep coming up internally, and does keep starting over at the beginning... without ever really getting resolved. So -- sorry, Enric. I hope it seems less like pressure to get you to change your mind -- and more of a lack of understanding and clarity on the part of the SIAB team. What we need is for someone in this group to take this on as a task and go the distance with figuring out what all this means. And write it all up as a clear thing on the wiki -- and hopefully in the future we can simply keep pointing to the wiki. I think the issue is least resolved around the flash player issues -- what are we going to include? How do those licenses line up. Do we have any lawyers in this group?? Anyone who's worked on software licensing before?? Any volunteers to really figure this out??? Jen On Nov 16, 2007, at 5:10 pm, Enric wrote: Yes, I've been finding it a bit frustrating getting repeated questions on why vPIP isn't GPL that I've explained several times. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Licensing
I invite the discussion -- especially as someone who is about to put a lot of time, effort, and years of skill into creating a kick-ass themeing engine then to give it away for free?? And as someone who runs her own business full-time, relying on my client base of income (ie: not someone who's working for a large company who pays me a salary, and then wants to release my work as GPL -- which is how most of Drupal is getting built). Mostly people will use SIAB as a way to get out of hiring a designer / developer, not as a way TO hire a desiger / developer, and share their results with the world (again, as Drupal works) ... j Jen Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jensimmons.com http://milkweedmediadesign.com 917-455-0022 skype: jensimmons On Nov 16, 2007, at 6:19 pm, Enric wrote: This may start a whole discussion back and forth. But, I find a problem with the philosophy and idea behind fully GPL and free software. As Richard Stallman posits freedom, it's the freedom of anyone to use software without restriction or barriers. The contradiction I find is that is that is purely accomplished by compelling those that create software to release all the code. So there is a contradiction in the word freedom in that it is taking away freedom of choice from those that create the work. I see the best result is a wide inclusion of those producing open source and mixed open and closed source products. That way a wide range of products and perspectives produce a rich, valuable source of software. -- Enric [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
