'GPL encumbrance problems'

[David G. Miller (aka DaveAtFraud)]

mike.mccarty at sbcglobal.net wrote:

> Tim wrote:
>
>> Mike McCarty:
>>
>>>>> One issue with this is in deployment in concert with development.
>>>>> Let's say that a company is going to build a new device, and wants
>>>>> to put an OS on an embedded computer, and develop some applications
>>>>> to run on it. This company does not want to divulge its trade
>>>>> secrets to the whole world for copying. Special techniques which
>>>>> may, for example, allow a cell phone to use lower power and still
>>>>> achieve good range, hence not cooking your brain.
>>>>
>>
>>  
>> Tim:
>>
>>>> Do you really think that competitors can't do that without access 
>>>> to the
>>>> source code?  Taking that example as a case in point, spectrum 
>>>> analysers
>>>
>>
>>
>> Mike McCarty:
>>
>>> Are you arguing with me, or with the large corporate lawyers?
>>
>>
>>
>> Against the point of view that source code, in itself, is a deadly
>> secret.  Against the idea that you can't sell a product without its
>> workings being secret.  Against the idea that you can keep its workings
>> secret.  And against the idea that suddenly you're out of business if
>> someone else discovers how it works.
>>
>
> Then against the lawyers.
>
> Mike 

It really does come down to a socialism vs. capitalism argument in the 
end.  The pro [L]GPL crowd points to a claimed beneficial leveling 
affect by everyone having access to everything and the pro closed source 
crowd points out that they won't work unless they see a profit from 
their labor.  As with many such issues, the scale of the contributor has 
a profound affect with mega-companies like Microsoft exhibiting all of 
the ill behavior associated with 19th century robber barons while the 
small contributors who have voiced an opinion here point out that they 
provide a unique solution that wouldn't be available to their customers 
if they weren't providing it.  Thus, some of us don't see a way to turn 
our little piece of the software world into a service oriented business 
but we do see enough customers willing to pay for our genius to make 
their life better and put bread on our table (the usual capitalist 
equation).

At least looking at history, socialist countries have stagnated while 
capitalist countries have created the miracles of the modern world.  I'm 
quite happy being exploited by said capitalists here in the USA and have 
no desire to go live in a "worker's paradise" such as North Korea.  My 
guess is we'll eventually see a mixed software economy develop where 
software that has a sufficient user/interest base will be free or nearly 
so and highly specialized programs that require significant arcane 
expertise will continue to demand a price and will be closed source to 
protect the investment in their development.  Demand that these programs 
release their source code and you will just see these choices be limited 
or cease to exist when the developers no longer have a way to recoup 
their development costs.

Cheers,
Dave