Picking a license

[Martin P. Hellwig]

On 05/09/10 04:49, Paul Rubin wrote:
<cut>
> As I read it, he is saying that when someone releases free software,
> they have "for all intends and purposes lost control over its use", so
> they "should have made peace with the fact" and surrender gracefully.
> I'm asking why he doesn't think Microsoft has lost control the same way.

Microsoft has indeed lost control of it in the same way, it is just 
because we here in the 'western' world spend huge amount of money on 
prosecuting and bringing to 'justice' does who, whether for commercial 
purposes or otherwise, make a copy of a piece of code. Think about it, 
it is not stealing, the original is still there and no further resources 
where needed from the original developer.

What I am saying is that all this license crap is only needed because we 
are used to a commercial environment where we can repeatedly profit from 
the same work already done.

I am not saying that you should not profit, of course you should 
otherwise there is no interest in making it in the first place.

What I am saying is that we as developers should encourage pay for work 
and not pay for code. This will, as I believe it, keep everything much 
more healthy and balanced. At least we can cut all the crap of software 
patents and copyrights.

For those who say it can't be done, sure it can, all you have to do is 
nothing, it takes effort to enforce policies.

-- 
mph