openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: Copyleft vs Permissive
Date Sat, 14 Jan 2017 03:54:00 GMT
Hi -

If Oracle or IBM thought they had any additional advantage with Apache OpenOffice development
then the history of this project would differ.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 13, 2017, at 3:55 PM, Peter Kovacs <leginee@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 12.01.2017 11:00, Pedro wrote:
>> Hi Peter
>> 
>>> If your model works directly with the Product, the flexibility of the
>>> Permissive license can be the stronger choice.
>>> I do not believe that a lot of people understand this.
>> 
>> Can you elaborate on this point? I don't really see how using a copyleftless license
is better when your business "works directly with the Product".
>> 
>> I see it as altruistic (like copyleft is communistic) but as a business model, I
really don't see how it is a "stronger choice". Using a copyleftless license allows anyone
else to build exactly the same product. 
> Never forget, all of this is a mind game. IF you fear something or feel confident it
is mostly based on your own weighting of arguments.
> 
> I assumed that if you work with a Product, then not all is released. Parts of it, are
closed, and therefore individual, but share a common base with other competitors.
> This can drop production/development cost or can shortcut knowledge original did not
available.
> 
> I can not imagin that you can directly earn from a Product if you only have copy left
license model. Some do, but this is only working if all other commiters more or less donate
to the cause.
> Or you have a complex method on lesser and full copy left structure. Which can results
in issue over time, if something that develops differently then you have planned.
> 
> The risk over time, is on Permissive licence lower. Also if this is viable option, you
can always retreat from the project without loosing your invest.
> 
> For us it means that Oracle, IBM can always start to market their own Product without
the need to return something towards Open Office. From Oracles or IBM position this is a strong
one.
> However I do not believe that the community is at the same time in a weaker position,
because Open Source is in my eyes not bound to market or earning strategy. Unlike companies
we can take time.
> You see that on the LO vs. OO discussion. Most of the LO argument are market based one.
If you think outside the market its all not an issue. What Reamains is the strength of Open
source as such.
> In my eyes we are in a super strong position, as long as we have a commiter base that
work for the greater good. And I am very convinced on the Open Office future.
> 
>> Regards,
>> Pedro
> my best regards
> Peter
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org


Mime
View raw message