On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 09:38:57AM +0530, V. Sasi Kumar wrote:
Just as a programmer has the freedom to make use of code written by
someone, (s)he has the responsibility to give back to the community
code that (s)he has written. I think that is the spirit. Do correct
me if I am wrong.
A second point is that the strength of Free Software originates
from the fact that thousands of programmers see the code and
identify bugs in it. Without this facility, there would hardly be
any difference between proprietary software and Free Software.
In view of both these aspects, it is essential that GPLd software
is made freely available to anyone who wishes to download it.
You are wrong Mr. Sasi Kumar. Even RMS wont agree to your argument. It
may be true for a general purpose software like an editor. But
programs for specific industry need not be or rather should not be
freely (as in free beer) available on net. Pls refer the discussions
on LIG some time back where for a similar case (RMS himself have
replied to it).
I appreciate OSS for showing others "We can make a living using Free
software business".
as far as GPL is concerned, you will be violating the spirit behind
it. It could also be sending the wrong message to society.
No. Not at all. Pls support OSS and similar industries so that the
idea of Free software business grows. Let's not kill or blame such a
movement. They are helping the FSF movement. They also should make a
living ... there is nothing wrong in it.
Don't blame somebody for something which we never does ourself.
Regards
--
.''`. Dileep M. Kumar <dileep(a)kumarayil.net>
: :' : http://www.kumarayil.net
`. `'`
`- Debian GNU/Linux - Choice of the Freedom Lovers
OSS may be the first free-software based bussiness moden in kerala. I
suggest a discussion on free-software bussiness model
But being a bussiness firm don't free them from their duties. OSS
says they provides the source code to their customers, which I beleaves
meaning less.
1. Why OSS is not ready to give the source code for public, when anybody
can get it from OSS's customers ?.(It only ensures that they get atleast one
customer !!!!!)
2. Why OSS beleve source should be opened? (Is it just because GPL says it?)
3. Now several persons says 'core softwares (OS,compilers etc) should be
free and the rest ........ How OSS view this?
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
On Sun, 2003-01-19 at 23:57, PostgreSQL Server wrote:
>
> We are distributing all software developed by OSS, under GPL since
the
> formation of OSS (ie in early 2000). It is accroding to the statements
in the
> OSS's bylaw. Its Arun's duty to prove his statment that OSS is taking
> opportunistic stand. Arun, you may recall the discussion between us at
Bose
> Bhavan, Ernakulam, when I have clarified all these things to you. Let
me make
> it clear that, It is not our duty to hand over the software to Arun.
GPL does
> not mention that software should be given to a particular person or
> Institution. We are distributing our package along with service for
a
> price. The customer gets its source code, they can modify it and they
can
> re-distribute it under GPL.
I am not aware of the details of your confusion with Arun, but I would
like to note a point or two here.
When we are dealing with moral and ethical issues that led to the
formation of the Free Software Movement, we cannot confine ourselves
just to the terms set forth in the GPL. The GPL is only a licencing
scheme that was formulated to reflect the principles of behind the Free
Software Movement. If we imbibe the spirit of the movement, then we will
be able to see that the whole issue is about sharing with the community,
and not just giving a copy of the source code to the customer, who, for
all one knows, would often not be able to make head or tail out of it.
Just as a programmer has the freedom to make use of code written by
someone, (s)he has the responsibility to give back to the community code
that (s)he has written. I think that is the spirit. Do correct me if I
am wrong.
A second point is that the strength of Free Software originates from the
fact that thousands of programmers see the code and identify bugs in it.
Without this facility, there would hardly be any difference between
proprietary software and Free Software.
In view of both these aspects, it is essential that GPLd software is
made freely available to anyone who wishes to download it.
>
> OSS (full name Open Software Solutions Industrial Co-operative Society
Ltd.
> Chottanikkara) is an Industrial Co-operative Society which is a good
example
> for social entreprenuership in the field of Information Technology.
The
> Society is having around 40 members among them one is honourary
member. All
> the regular members, who were now associating with OSS is fully
depended on
> OSS. They have no other income. The honourary member does not accept
any
> payment from OSS. So it is the responsibility of OSS to provide income
to its
> member. So we provide software solution for local needs for a price.
It is understandable that those who work for the organisation have to
earn their livelihood. The general understanding in the Free Software
community is that this should be achieved through selling services. You
certainly have the right to charge for installation and maintenance from
every user who engages you to install and maintain. If you insist that
you will give the source code only to those who purchase the software
from you, then, even if you may not be violating the letter of the law
as far as GPL is concerned, you will be violating the spirit behind it.
It could also be sending the wrong message to society.
It may be easy to say that, if you cannot make a living through selling
services, then you do something else. But we all know that in the
context of our state this is not easily practiced. But I am not sure
that not putting up your software for download would help you earn more
income. If a programmer really wanted to make use of your code, (s)he
could get it from one of your customers, as you yourself have stated.
Or, am I wrong there?
> > - Is software patents and 'closing' the source only issues ?
> > - What is the stand on 'cost effective' proprietary software ?
> I thing softare part of our discussion will be focused on GPL'd
software. Cost
> effectiveness is also a important matter of concern
Cost effectiveness becomes secondary because of a few reasons. I think
the most important issue is empowerment. People who talk about Total
Cost of Ownership forget about the costs of dependency in the long term
and the gain to society through empowerment. While cost becomes
important for a society like ours, it can be properly considered only
when all the implications are taken into consideration, and not just the
immediate cost of implementation. I find a similarity here with the
debate about environment and development, where many people tended to
overlook the long term environmental costs of development projects and
saw only the short term benefits. It is, therefore, important to see
things in their proper perspective.
Regards
V. Sasi Kumar
Dear friends,
Oneworld.net is organising a meet of its NGO partners in early
February. So, at the last minute (virtually) a thought struck me and I
dashed off a mail to Delhi. If we are talking about the principles of
freedom and development, wouldn't it make sense to talk about Free
Software, GNU/Linux and related issues?
Jaba Menon called back from Delhi, and offered to have a one-hour panel,
which possibly could be included to sensitise NGOs to the entire debate
about freedom around software concerns. Needless to say, this has immense
implications not just to software, but also to knowledge and information,
and how we gain/lose from the entire framing of the copyright debate.
I'm copying this letter to friends in Delhi. Oneworld needs to put
together a panel of 2-3 persons, who could speak for an hour collectively,
and also field questions.
Raju Mathur, Tripta@Sarai and Sunil Abraham, these are the first three
names that came to my mind. Could you'll help please? I know that Sunil is
in Bangalore, but he has done useful work in helping NGOs shift over to
software generally, and of late, in promoting Free Software.
Raju has both the technical and oratorial skills. Tripta is with an NGO
herself (Sarai), and that too, one of the few that has been strongly
pro-Free Software.
Am copying this message also to Karl, who is working on the international
NGU project, meant to take Free Software to the NGOs. Please let's work
together to make this happen. I would very much like to be in Delhi, but
my writing commitments mean it is difficult to take time off without
everything else collapsing here, since I work on my own. FN
--
Frederick Noronha Freelance Journalist
Goa India 0091.832.2409490/2409783
http://www.bytesforall.org
Writing with a difference ... on what makes *the* difference
CNBC is broadcasting a story on tuesday 10:30pm. I expect the story
is about the spread of GNU/Linux. I was also interviewed for this, so
I know :-).
Nagarjuna
NGOs AND FREE SOFTWARE: A MADE FOR EACH OTHER MATCH?
This writer believes that this would be so, because:
o If NGOs don't subscribe to the principles of sharing
freely, reuse and waste-minimisation, then who will?
o If NGOs take the easy way out and end up on the
side of a global monopoly, then words and deeds don't match.
o 'Freedom' is something NGOs always talk about, in whatever
form. In the software world, this is already a reality.
The possibility exists; are we ready to take a little extra
trouble (the initial learning curve) in opting for it?
o Because NGOs need quality, stable software.
o Because NGOs are even more talent-rich, resource-poor than
most in the Third World.
o Because Free Software works out reasonably priced both in
the short and long term.
o Because Free Software creates local jobs and multiplies
local skills.
o Because Free Software is transparent enough for you to
(i) learn it, if you have the technical background (ii) make
custom changes in the manner you wish to, or pay others to
do this for you (iii) enable both you and your staff to
learn at a much more deeper, rather than superficial level.
o Because Free Software is an ethical choice -- not one of
convenience. Copyleft 2003, FN
If anyone would like to add to the above list, feel free to do so.
--
Frederick Noronha Freelance Journalist
Goa India 0091.832.2409490/2409783
http://www.bytesforall.org
Writing with a difference ... on what makes *the* difference
I am afraid you are wrong here. GPL'd software need not be open to
any third party. ie, If I sell you a GPL'd software I should give
you the source also along with the binary. But I need not give
your friend the source of same same software till he purchases it.
Thanks. I stand corrected. I quote sec 3.
You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms
of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the
following:
* a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software
interchange; or,
* b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
customarily used for software interchange; or,
[....]
The important point to note is that the first para says "...you also
do *one* of the following..". Since the party involved is already
distributing source to the customers, (which is (a)), he does not
need to do (b).
thanks Dileep, for pointing this error out.
best regards
ramakrishnan
Hai friends,
During the last week of Dec '02 there was a 'Kerala Sangamam' organized by
Kerala chapter of 'World Social Forum' . The main agenda was to create a
common platform for the efforts of various groups who works for alternative
Keralam, and make them work together for common cause.
Ther was very active discussion on Software under GPL and on Modernisation of
Goverment Program (MGP) using IT. The meet has come to a conclusion that
current IT policy and MGP are not on the correct track. It is also decided
to conduct a workshop at Kochi during March '03, on MGP for Keralam and IT
policy for Keralam. The targeted output of the workshop is an alternative
MGP programm and Alternative IT policy for Keralam.
ATPS (Appropriate Technology Promotion Society - Kochi) is entrusted to
organise the workshop. The ATPS is trying for maximum participation in the
work shop. Prior to this a discussion on this subject can be started on this
subject. Here I submit a draft document prepared by me for initiating a
discussion on IT policy for Keralam.
Regards,
Anil-Kanhangad
ATPS
DISCUSSION PAPER
--------------------------------
History of Science & Technology
-----------------------------------------------
Almost all technical advances are response to social, economic demands made
entirely in earlier times and some times even now by the craftsmen,
themselves working over and improving their traditional skills. Science is a
later event, which emerges in recognizable form from common social tradition
on crafts, only with the beginning of civilisation. These separate streams
of technology and science were run apart from each other in earlier age.
The conditions of earlier civilisation led to a division of classes, which
put scientists in a privileged class while manual craftsmen were only a
grade above slaves. This division and its impact on all walks of life
condemned science to sterility and techniques to frequent stagnation, while
radical advances came only rarely. These occasional advances partially broke
down and there was gradual growth in mutual stimulation of scientist and
craftsmen. The recent scientific technical transformation by which modern
Information Technology has been evolved is results of such a fusion of
Science and Technology.
Information Technology Revolution
--------------------------------------------------
The Information Technology revolution, as any other historical creative
process appear as a consequence of great social, economic and political
movements. The period of technical scientific advance which gave birth to
modern Information Technology is in full swing for above fifty years.
Ignoring these historical facts, Information Technology, which is a
collection of techniques for gathering, storing and processing of data and
its dissemination as information, which is as old as society itself, is being
presented as a new discovery by its new pseudo care-takers. By this
continuous and vigorous campaign, Information Technology often termed as mere
software and computer hardware technology. These new imposed definition has
led Information Technology as facilitation for a group of elite classes,
which in turn leads for a so called digital divide in the society where
people is divided as information rich and information poor.
Information Technology and society
----------------------------------------------------
The relation of IT and society are fully reciprocal, just as transformation
are produced inside IT by social events, so have social transformation been
brought about through the use of IT. These direct or indirect effects
operating on the material frame work of society and on the idea by which it
is sustained. The easily seen direct changes are taken to be the main result
of IT by most people. But indirect effects are for more important. Though
initial growth of IT was a product of economic and political factors, once it
is established as means of securing economic and political power, its very
existence become a factor in social life. So it is very much essential to
study the total impact of IT, on society whether it is manifold, direct or
indirect .
Judging from the appropriate flexibility of IT as any other technological
tool, it can be stated as neutral and it is the purpose for which it is used,
is making the difference. Following are the major economic and political
compulsion behind the rapid growth of modern Information Technology.
--Processing large volume of Information generated within a short time of war
related operation for strategic advantage of nations and for extending the
control of state over its citizen.
--The Information processing needed to monitor and control production cost and
setting of large surplus of capitalist production in a dispersed market.
IT for Sustainable Development
----------------------------------------------
Bright futures that IT brings to human kind have been described by many of
its conventional promoters. They name it Information Society where
information and scientific knowledge replaces human labour as main productive
force.
These future is not going to be that bright or may be even disastrous until
and unless the big mass, to whom it ultimately affects, whose jobs will be
ultimately replaced, has effectively intervened in the process of making
information society with a definite intention of bringing a sustainable
development where all sorts of inequalities are narrowed down.
But, the current growth of Information Technology is a typical example of cart
before bull. New innovations rarely match the sustainable development needs
and always focus on elite sections. New IT innovations are the result of a
fierce war for larger market share by a few trans-national companies. Major
impact of this phenomenon are
--It effectively hegemonies technology by providing earlier access to new
technology only to interested parties.
--It limits the production and availability at low technological, low cost
options, preferably most profitable one.
Appropriate IT Solution
---------------------------------
For financially starved but intellectual rich country like India emergence of
IT revolution is taken as good news. But harnessing the full potential of IT
requires an aggressive and visionary policy frame work and creative planning
and wider participation of its people at large. The current white collar
jobs which fills the gap of conventional inefficient information system will
be made void by extensive use of IT. However with a vibrant vision and
action plan the human power can be diverted to the more productive zones
where they can contribute more effectively which are newly created with the
advent IT. If the peoples participation in implementation of IT is not
ensured, the complete benefits will be taken away by section of the society
with vested interest.
Now, global market for IT is predominantly western. A less developed economy
trying to penetrate in the world market of information technology can thus be
effectively contained by the market leaders. The strict intellectual
property rights law in some developed countries are already threatening the
new innovation in IT sector. Unless one can design an IT solution truly
needed for the social and cultural milieu, it may be impossible to develop
systems that satisfy the sustainable development needs. It is therefor very
much essential to develop our own methodology and techniques in providing IT
solution for social needs.
Compared to other activities of IT software, hardware and infrastructure
cost seems to be at higher level, while its local expertise remains low.
However, cost effective solutions such as localy assembled hardware and
relatively higher bandwidth of Wireless Local Loop (WILL) which exactly match
the rural network need can be considered.
In case of software there is a global movement for cost-effective solutions,
popularly known as 'free software' which are distributed under General
Public License (GPL). With the use of these software local software expertise
will increase and cost of software development will be fully distributed for
local employment generation. Closed approach of patented software ultimately
cause degradation of our existing software expertise. While use of patented
software will take away a huge ammount as software cost and license fees by
trans-national companies.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prepared by Anil-Kanhangad K V for ATPS
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 08:27:24AM +0530, Ramakrishnan M wrote:
>>>According to GNU GPL section 3(b), you are supposed to distribute
>>>the sourcecode to any "third party" who requests your code, since
>>>you said you are distributing it to customers.
I am afraid you are wrong here. GPL'd software need not be open to any
third party. ie, If I sell you a GPL'd software I should give you the
source also along with the binary. But I need not give your friend
the source of same same software till he purchases it.
But of-course you can give the source to your friend. :-)
Regards
--
.''`. Dileep M. Kumar <dileep(a)kumarayil.net>
: :' : http://www.kumarayil.net
`. `'`
`- Debian GNU/Linux - Choice of the Freedom Lovers