openoffice-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From build...@apache.org
Subject svn commit: r841989 - in /websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk: cgi-bin/ content/ content/why/other/compliance.html content/why/other/volunteers.html
Date Wed, 12 Dec 2012 21:40:27 GMT
Author: buildbot
Date: Wed Dec 12 21:40:26 2012
New Revision: 841989

Log:
Staging update by buildbot for openofficeorg

Added:
    websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/other/volunteers.html
Modified:
    websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/cgi-bin/   (props changed)
    websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content/   (props changed)
    websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/other/compliance.html

Propchange: websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/cgi-bin/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- cms:source-revision (original)
+++ cms:source-revision Wed Dec 12 21:40:26 2012
@@ -1 +1 @@
-1420810
+1420991

Propchange: websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- cms:source-revision (original)
+++ cms:source-revision Wed Dec 12 21:40:26 2012
@@ -1 +1 @@
-1420810
+1420991

Modified: websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/other/compliance.html
==============================================================================
--- websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/other/compliance.html (original)
+++ websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/other/compliance.html Wed Dec 12 21:40:26
2012
@@ -22,36 +22,36 @@
     
     <h1 class="title">Compliance Costs and the Apache License</h1>
     <h2 id="software-license-compliance-costs">Software License Compliance Costs</h2>
-<p>The Business Software Alliance <a href="https://reporting.bsa.org/r/report/add.aspx?src=us">offers
cash rewards</a>, up to $1 million, to disgruntled employees who confidentially turn
in their employer (or ex-employer) for software piracy.<br />
-They call this campaign, "Bust your Boss!"</p>
-<p>As you probably already know, you don't own commercial software in the same way
you own a chair or a desk.  You license the software from the vendor, and this license gives
you
-permission to use the software, under terms specified by the license.  These terms might
include how many users or PC's may access the software.  The terms might even include
+<p>The software industry watchdog, the Business Software Alliance, <a href="https://reporting.bsa.org/r/report/add.aspx?src=us">offers
cash rewards</a> to disgruntled employees who confidentially turn in their 
+employer (or ex-employer) for software piracy.</p>
+<p>They call this campaign, "Bust your Boss!"  Rewards can range up to $1 million.</p>
+<p>As you probably already know, you don't own commercial software in the same way
you own a chair or a desk.  Instead, you license the software from the vendor, and this license
gives you
+permission to use the software, but only under terms specified by the license.  These terms
typically say how many users or PC's may access the software.  The terms might even include
 a clause allowing the vendor to audit your usage of the software.</p>
-<p>In order to avoid the expense and penalties of a BSA audit, companies institute
Software Asset Management (SAM) practices to ensure that their use of commercial software
complies
-with the applicable licenses.  These practices generally include employee education along
with the purchase of software to track licenses and software use within the organization.</p>
-<p>The combined costs of these practices is the "cost of compliance" for using commercial
software.  It is an expense that does not make your organization more productive, does not
benefit
-your customers and adds nothing to the bottom line. It is purely risk mitigation.  Along
with license, maintenance and training costs, it is one of the costs of working with commercial
-software.</p>
+<p>In order to avoid the expense and penalties of a BSA audit, organizations are increasingly
adopting Software Asset Management (SAM) practices to ensure that their use of commercial

+software complies with the applicable licenses.  These practices generally include employee
education along with the purchase of software to track licenses and software use within 
+the organization.</p>
+<p>The combined cost of these SAM practices is the "cost of compliance" for using commercial
software.  It is an expense that does not make your organization more productive, does not

+benefit your customers and adds nothing to the bottom line. It is purely risk mitigation.
 Along with license, maintenance and training costs, it is one of the expenses of using
+commercial software.</p>
 <h2 id="open-source-compliance-costs">Open Source Compliance Costs</h2>
-<p>As opposed to commercial EULA-style software licenses, open source software have
licenses that explicitly permit free redistribution.  This reduces the cost of compliance
for many
-organizations.</p>
+<p>As opposed to commercial software licenses, open source software have licenses that
explicitly permit free redistribution.  This reduces the cost of compliance for many
+organizations, since tracking application usage is not needed.</p>
 <p>However, organizations that use open source software and also develop and distribute
their own proprietary software, can find themselves in trouble due to the viral nature (copyleft)
-of some open source licenses.  If one of your programmers inadvertently includes some copyleft
code into your proprietary product, you could be required to make the source code for
-your entire product freely available to the public.<br />
-</p>
-<p>This is not a theoretical concern.  As aggressively as the BSA protects the interests
of its commercial members,
-the Software Freedom Law Center protects the GPL license in <a href="http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/dec/14/busybox-gpl-lawsuit/">high-profile
lawsuits against large corporations</a>, including 
-Westinghouse, Samsung and Best Buy.</p>
-<p>So the cost of compliance with copyleft code is as bad or even greater than the
use of proprietary software, since an organization risks being forced to make the source code
-for their proprietary product public and available for anyone to use, free of charge.  To
mitigate this risk requires
-more employee education, more approval cycles, more audits, more worries and more risk. 
This is the increased 
-cost of compliance when copyleft software is brought into an organization.</p>
-<h2 id="advantages-of-the-apache-license">Advantages of the Apache License</h2>
+of some open source licenses.  If one of your employees or contractors inadvertently includes
some copyleft code in your proprietary product, then you could be required by that license
+to make the source code for your entire product freely available to the public.  That could
kill your business.</p>
+<p>This is not just a theoretical concern.  As aggressively as the BSA protects the
interests of its commercial members, the Software Freedom Law Center protects the GPL license

+in <a href="http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/dec/14/busybox-gpl-lawsuit/">high-profile
lawsuits against large corporations</a>, including Westinghouse, Samsung and Best Buy.</p>
+<p>So the cost of compliance with copyleft code can be even greater than the use of
proprietary software, since an organization risks being forced to make the source code
+for their proprietary product public and available for anyone to use, free of charge.  To
mitigate this risk requires more employee education, more approval cycles, more internal audits

+and more worries.  This is the increased cost of compliance when copyleft software is brought
into an organization.</p>
+<h2 id="the-apache-advantage">The Apache Advantage</h2>
 <p>Not all open source licenses are copyleft license.  Not all of them have that viral
quality that radically increases the risk for an organization.  A subset of open source licenses,
-generally called "permissive" licenses, are much friendly for corporate use.  These licenses
include the MIT and BSD licenses, as well as the <a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0">Apache
Software License 2.0</a> that we use.</p>
+generally called "permissive" licenses, are much more friendly for corporate use.  These
licenses include the MIT and BSD licenses, as well as the <a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0">Apache
Software License 2.0</a> 
+that we use for Apache OpenOffice.</p>
 <p>Like other open source licenses, the Apache License explicitly allows you to copy
and redistribute the covered product, without any license fees or royalties.  But because
it is a
 permissive license, it also allows you to prepare and distribute derivative products, without
any requirement to make your own source code public.  So both BSA and SFLC risks
-are eliminated.  The cost of license compliance is drastically reduced.</p>
+are eliminated, and the cost, to your businessa, of license compliance is drastically reduced.</p>
   </div>
 <!--#include virtual="/footer.html" -->
 </body>

Added: websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/other/volunteers.html
==============================================================================
--- websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/other/volunteers.html (added)
+++ websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content/why/other/volunteers.html Wed Dec 12 21:40:26
2012
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/doctype.html" -->
+<html>
+<head>
+<link href="/css/ooo.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css">
+
+<title>Volunteers, not Amateurs
</title>
+<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
+
+
+<!--#include virtual="/google-analytics.js" -->
+</head>
+<body>
+<!--#include virtual="/brand.html" -->
+  <div id="topbara">
+    <!--#include virtual="/topnav.html" -->
+    <div id="breadcrumbsa"><a href="/">home</a>&nbsp;&raquo;&nbsp;<a
href="/why/">why</a>&nbsp;&raquo;&nbsp;<a href="/why/other/">other</a></div>
+  </div>
+  <div id="clear"></div>
+  <!--#include virtual="/why/leftnav.html" -->
+  
+  <div id="content">
+    
+    <h1 class="title">Volunteers, not Amateurs
</h1>
+    <h2 id="complicated-software-developed-by-volunteers">Complicated software, developed
by volunteers?</h2>
+<p>Apache OpenOffice is developed 100% by volunteers.  Apache does not pay for developers,
for translators, for QA, for marketing, for UI, for support, etc.  Of course, we're
+happy to accept <a href="http://www.apache.org/foundation/contributing.html">donations
to the Apache Software Foundation</a>, to keep our servers runnings and for similar
ovehead expenses.  But our products are developed entirely by volunteers.</p>
+<p>Some users are intially worried by this statement.  How can software for free, developed
by volunteers, be any good?</p>
+<h2 id="talent-as-deep-as-any-corporation">Talent as deep as any corporation</h2>
+<p>OpenOffice, through its decade plus existance, has had, and continues to benefit
from the contributions of many professionals.  Some are sponsored by their employers to volunteer
+with the project.  At one time or another Sun, Oracle, Novell, Redhat, IBM and others have
sponsored their employees to work on OpenOffice.  Some professional are recently retired
+and work on the project to keep their skills sharp or to "give back" to the open source community.
 Others have a business based on OpenOffice consulting, and volunteer with the 
+project to stay close to potential customers.   Others are students, studying software engineering
or a related field, and participate in our project as a form of electronic 
+internship.<br />
+</p>
+<p>So our all-volunteer principle is a statement of how we are organized, as a non-profit.
 But this is not a statement on the professionalism and talent of our volunteers.  In fact,
+very few corporations would be able to afford the kind of talent that we have, as volunteers,
helping with Apache OpenOffice.</p>
+  </div>
+<!--#include virtual="/footer.html" -->
+</body>
+</html>



Mime
View raw message