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

Re: proprietary doesn't bother me

Author:Eric Kidd
Posted:9/10/2000; 2:09:22 PM
Topic:Guido and Richard
Msg #:21120 (In response to 21116)
Prev/Next:21119 / 21121

When I give out software the license resembles BSD, and might as well be Dave Winer's hypothetical "no crybabies" license. RedHat could make a proprietary version, and I don't care.

Same here, actually. Look at the license on CustomDNS, my current skunkworks project. (And a suprisingly good source of consulting revenue.)

I use the XFree86 license, because I don't care if someone makes a proprietary version of CustomDNS. In fact, one of my clients intends to create an in-house version (for their website), and I spent this morning encouraging them.

I'm just trying to explain why other developers occasionally see some merit in the GPL. It's a counter-intuitive license, but some people find it useful.

Commercial Developers

Please note I agree with Dave Winer that commercial software is not the same thing as proprietary software. Commercial has to do with being a going business concern with cash flow, and doesn't imply a closed or antisocial technological model.

Trust me. I know. ;-)

My consulting business is a going concern, with cash flow. But I release all my products as open source. I even have advertising copy for my open source software, complete with tacky, annoying hype. Somehow, I still make a pretty decent living.

I call myself a "commercial open source developer". I also consider myself lucky to have such a great job!

Cheers,
Eric




This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:37 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.