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" wrote:
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.
This is a wrong argument. Why it should not be available on the net. It is up to the developer to decide depending on what he want. If he thinks that more people seeing the code will help him then he puts it on the net. My personal view is that, if the software is meant for a industry, for example for a bank, they will definitely go for a copy from the original vendor for regular use with some sort of maintenance support. Putting it on the web just help in terms of advertisement. If it a a game for home use, at least our people are not going to spend money on a legal copy. I would say the software meant for etc. should be put on the net so that more people will be aware of it but I donot think any serious bank will just grab a copy and run it.
regards
Ajith
Ajith Kumar wrote on Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:34:54PM +0530: ,---- | > 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. | | This is a wrong argument. Why it should not be available on the net. `----
both of you have your points. only that this needs to be put together. :) To quote RMS (his visit to chennai, MIT):
<quote> I should explain that the issue of free vs proprietary software arises for published software. it doesn't arise for typically custom software there you know if you write the program for one company and they use it in-house. well, they do have, presumably, they do have full freedom. They are not obligated to ever release it. but they have the freedom to do so. so its fine. The ethical issue I've been talking about arises when software is published. when its avlbl for users to get copy. </quote>
-Suraj
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:34:54PM +0530, Ajith Kumar wrote:
This is a wrong argument. Why it should not be available on the net.
I believe Free software is not Free Lunch (or Masala Dosa). If any student need the source he can always approach the OSS's customers.
BTW I am not related to OSS so whatever I say is my opinion only. Also I am not an Open Source follower. I believe/respect Free Software/GPL/GNU only. The term Open Source Software itself is bad for the movement... my opinion.
Regards
-
Ajith Kumar -
Dileep M. Kumar -
Suraj Kumar