On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 03:42:47PM -0400, William Chops Westfield wrote:
>=20
> On Aug 20, 2011, at 7:26 AM, Byron Jeff wrote:
>=20
> > GPL type licenses are the most "open"
> > because they have a ruleset that distributes the most rights to the =20
> > most
> > groups. Others are less restrictive in terms of requirements, but =20
> > often at
> > the loss of availability to one or more of the above groups, =20
> > including many
> > times O, the originator of the project.
>=20
> I've never heard it described quite like that.  Interestingly put...

I've always seen open licensing as an optimization problem. The cost of
this distribution is that it makes the work virtually valueless.

Face it, Linux and the GCC compiler are very useful tools. But neither
could be effectively sold for more than a couple of nickles to a wide scale
audience as software.

It only gets interesting when the software is embedded in a product.
Developers can leverage the large software base, and have a product to sell
to users. Even if users have all the software source at their disposal,
it's unlikely that many will leverage derivatives to sell en masse (unless
a large corp is involved).

BAJ

>=20
> BillW
>=20
> --=20
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--=20
Byron A. Jeff
Department Chair: IT/CS/CNET
College of Information and Mathematical Sciences
Clayton State University
http://cims.clayton.edu/bjeff
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.