On 12-Jan-07, at 11:02 PM, Rony wrote:
You are confusing between open software that you publicly distribute/sell to many and customized software made for an individual company. FOS Software created and customized for a company is anyway private and will not be distributed to others.
wrong - there is no distinction - if it is FOSS, even distributing to one person constitutes a release and that person, and the rest of the world gets the rights under it
FOS Software sold/distributed openly is open for distribution ( of the code ) by all under the GPL.
are you doing this deliberately? Even Stallman himself does not say that only software under GPL is FOSS. There are a large number of licenses to choose from - and all FOSS licenses. GPL is only one of the many
When you create software you are free to choose the license under which you want to distribute it according to your ideological beliefs.
nothing to do with ideology - it all depends on your business model. Idealogues preach, they dont create software
The FOSS ideology believes that since you use FOSS resources for creating your piece, you are duty bound to give back the changes you made *iff_you * distribute it to others. Please note that the FOSS ideology does not work out economically with retail software.
idealogy and business dont mix. But the FOSS business model works out economically even with retail and customised software - especially customised software
FOSS earns big/mega bucks through support and customization.
also true
Others may correct me if I am wrong, but if a developer uses FOSS and modifies it for a customer/company, he is *not* bound to give out the code, even to that customer, unless is demanded under the agreement made between the 2 parties.
you are wrong - he is bound to give the code - there is no distinction between public sale and private sale
But if he sells/distributes the modified code openly to anyone, he is bound to reveal the modifications made.
true