Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 06:15, Andy Green wrote:
What I don't really understand is how you go *poof* out of the market
when you sell gadgets that need a open source driver ? People still
would have to by the gadget, wouldn't they ?
The worry is that when much of what makes the gadget innovative is tied
up in the code that must be opened, people will indeed still buy the
gadget, but perhaps not from the original author of the opened code...
Or, the gadget depends on code already written and under another
license. The GPL is all-or-nothing in this regard so if any
component (with some interpretation of components...) needs
a non-GPL license, none can have it. Personally I think this
is indefensibly anti-competitive. Imagine if Microsoft said
that if you used any 3rd party DLLs along with their code
the 3rd party code suddenly become controlled by Microsoft's
license. I'm not a lawyer, and even if I were I wouldn't risk
a business on that interpretation, but there is just something
wrong with the concept that you can't combine different products
to add value.
Thank you, Les. I have tried to say this a few times in this
thread, but you have hit it right on the head.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
