OT - Closing Off An Open-Source Product

[phil hunt]

On Fri, 13 Apr 2001 11:24:23 -0500 (CDT), Chris Watson <chris at voodooland.net> wrote:
>> Why is that bad, but taking free code and putting it into a closed-source
>> product, thus also killing its free nature, is somehow good?
>
>Ok. Again I refer to my original argument to this. Assuming foo.c version
>1.0 released under the BSD license. Company X comes along and grabs a copy
>of foo.c version 1.0. Modifies it and refuses to release *their* work. Or
>their copy of version 1.0 of foo.c. Ok now, tell me what divine creature
>came alone with pointy horns or angel wings and completely irradicated

Why the over-the-top language?

>foo.c version 1.0 under a BSDL off the face of the earth.

No-one did, of course. The original is still available.

Now, what if another person grabs a copy of foo.c, modifies it, and releases
the result under the GPL? The original is *still* available, as in your scenario,
and thrid parties can do everything with the original foo.c that they could in
your scenario. Third parties can do more in fact, because GPL'd software allows
you to do *more* things with it than proprietary software.

>So the GPL must have other motives

Well, of course. The GPL, the BSDL, and proprietary licenses are
all different from each other, and therefore one would use them to
have different effects. Note that one person could well use *all
three*, for different purposes, just as travelling by car doesn't
mean that someone is ideologically opposed to trvalling by plane 
or train.

-- 
*****[ Phil Hunt ***** philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk ]*****
"Mommy, make the nasty penguin go away." -- Jim Allchin, MS head 
of OS development, regarding open source software (paraphrased).