From: Gregory Brown <gregory.t.brown@...>
Date: 2005-10-03T12:56:47+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby licence...


Kevin Brown wrote:
> On Sunday 02 October 2005 16:01, Greg Brown wrote:
> > Kevin Brown wrote:
> [*snip*]
> > > Once they've bought
> > > my product, they have the source, and can modify/extend/learn to their
> > > heart's content.  If they sell something off of it, or re-distribute, we
> > > believe we deserve a cut.
> >
> > How far down the chain do you think this works?  Do you think that an
> > author should pay for every book written in word?  The ethics of this
> > boil down to software licensing, which by definition makes a piece of
> > software non free.
>
> Not far at all.  They do not have to pay per use, machine, or anything of the
> sort.  Simply, once your company purchases the product, the company can use
> it to fit their needs, unless that involves giving it to a different company.

That's still technically not free software.  I think this may fit under
the Open Source definition though.  Which of course, is better than
proprietary software and I've worked (and am working) on projects that
are under this kind of model.  I still think that to go free where
possible is best, but any openness is better than none.

> I never considered for a second anything that interferes with the way the
> program works.  Doing this would involve logging keystrokes, counting,
> calling home, lots of extra junk.

Good.  Sorry about that ridiculous accusation.

> Side note: The people who buy my software WILL charge their customers by the
> keystroke, or more accurately by the record entered.  They are data entry
> houses.

Yeah, I know how they roll, I'm basically in the same boat :)