I guess the point being missed out in this discussion, as I pointed
out in my previous mail, is that Free Software (I shall leave out Open
Source...I'm still hazy about it) was created as a concept to empower
_users_, and not companies. Irrespective of whether an Adobe or a
Microsoft, or even IBM, make business if they start giving away the
source code or not; GPL was designed to ensure that an end user has
the flexibility to change the code if he/she is not happy with its
functionality. So, if you are able to make a living out of
customizing, and providing service for GPL'd products, good..you are
an example the FS community can use for promotion of GPL. If you are
not, that *doesn't* serve as an argument for discarding GPL...it
should still exist to serve the ideologies for which it was sketched
out. As far as GPL's viral condition is concerned, if it had not been
for it, we would have for sure had lesser GPL'd software around...and
that is not good for the FS community...and that's good enough reason
for it to stay.
If you still want to make software keeping only greater profits in
mind, and not the users, go ahead...nobody is stopping you...but don't
expect the FS community to help you out in any way...this is what the
GPL should ensure...and it does a good job at that...
--
The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck
is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners.
-Ernst Jan Plugge
