[OT] open-source license issues

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Daniel Gibson" <metalcaedes at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:io1c0b$jsc$18 at digitalmars.com...
> Am 12.04.2011 13:02, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
>>
>> Sending out a press release is dirt-cheap. If EvilSoftwareCo is actually
>> making significant money, then it's very likely that some news outlets 
>> would
>> jump at a story like "Big company charging people for a free program."
>>
>> Or even better yet: EvilSoftwareCo would have done the hard work of 
>> proving
>> that there's a viable commercial market for Foo. Since I already have the
>> same product, I either de-OSS the next version of Foo or cave and make it
>> GPL, go get the world's easiest VC or business loan (again, 
>> EvilSoftwareCo
>> did the hard work of proving the viable market), use those funds to
>> advertise/market about being "The real creator of Foo", undercut
>> EvilSoftwareCo, and then laugh all the way to the bank as EvilSoftwareCo
>> goes under.
>>
>
> What's left on that market when EvilSoftwareCo is already in it?
> "I wanna sell a Office Suite, Microsoft makes millions with it so it's a
> viable market"
>

If I had actually created Office Suite and owned the rights to it, I do 
think I would have a good shot at making some inroads with the combination 
of "I made it and own it" and undercutting.

And even if not, at least lots of people would be using my software. If I 
had actually been giving it away in the first place, then clearly that would 
have been my larger goal anyway. Being "creator of MS Office" would look 
pretty good on a resume', and that would be something they they would have 
actually *helped* you with - something you wouldn't likely have had 
otherwise.

And most of all, I really think the chances of getting irreprably screwed 
over like that by putting a program out as BSD instead of GPL are small 
enough to just not be worth worrying about. Heck, you'd probably have a 
better chance of getting killed by another car on the way to the grocery 
store.


>>
>>>
>>> The problem is not only that they get money for your code (+their
>>> extras), it's also that suddenly there's an incompatible version of your
>>> program.
>>> Maybe it's incompatible with your file formats etc. If their FooPlus is
>>> successful your Foo may become obsolete.
>>
>> That would still be equally possible even if FooPlus were a completely 
>> open
>> project.
>>
>
> But than you could at least integrate their changes into your version to
> support their file format etc

Yea, but now the whole argument has been whittled down to quite a lot of 
"if"s.