Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: Intrinsic vs. Market Value

Author:Ken MacLeod
Posted:8/25/2000; 1:15:53 PM
Topic:Next survey: Are you an open source developer?
Msg #:20249 (In response to 20239)
Prev/Next:20248 / 20250

One part in the idea of intrinsic value and market value that escapes me in the GPL vs. "TrulyFree(TM)" licenses debate is how the "TrulyFree" licenses raise the market value to any significant degree.

If I understand the argument, GPL deprives people writing derivative code from profiting from their creativity (that's the easy part). Taking GCC for example, GCC has driven out the makers of competitive compilers by being "good enough". Let's stop there for a second, and say, "wouldn't a TrulyFree compiler do the same?" I would think so.

OK, given that a TrulyFree compiler would drive competitive compilers out of the business, what is left is the ability for creative developers to add marginal value to the TrulyFree compiler by taking the TrulyFree compiler and making proprietary extensions. I am sure there is great short-term profit available there. But, the "problem" with open source, in general, is that there's always developers out there who are interested in improving the base of TrulyFree or even OpenSource software that they will eventually get around to making the same extensions TF or OS.

Is this whole argument about short-term profits?

Take GhostScript and Aladdin as an example. For a long time they've kept a non-OS, non-TF, version of GhostScript available for licensing, and then make a GPL version available a year afterwards. They're making their short term profit and releasing "poison pill" licensed software. (Oddly enough, they're preventing a competitor from doing the same thing, with Aladdin's software, by using the GPL specifically.)

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:17 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.