[Reader-list] IBM frees 500 software patents

[Oli]

Thank you Pankaj,

yes, there's nothing wrong about your arguments. And it is possible that my 
point is not interesting for you. But still:

What if Open Source is a competitive advantage; the *better* capitalist 
strategy?

And yes: the basic idea of sharing the code is untouched. But as we (those, 
who share the code) are not all in the same economic/social situation (e.g. 
IBM and me), Open Source works as an amplifier of already existing 
inequalities. You claim Open Source to be neutral to its surroundings. And 
I think this focus is too small. Technology and its policies always relate 
strongly on society and player in the society.

I do not think that isolating the GPL from society and economical relations 
is a helpful step. The Public Domain is not a good concept, when some are 
able to use it to improve their leadership, what we are exactly facing with 
IBM. That's my simple point. Sharing between unequal parties: thats what 
open source promotes, when being contextualized in social and economical 
sourroundings.

Oh yes, everyone should get paid! And thank you again for promoting the GNU 
perspective.

-oli

--On Thursday, January 13, 2005 10:57:07 +0530 Pankaj kaushal 
<penguinhead at linux-delhi.org> wrote:

> Oli wrote:
>>
> [snip]
>> So, open source is not innocent. It's a tool being used more and more
>> for competitive advantage. How does the 'open source community' react?
>> Is this an issue and for whom?
>
> What exactly is innocence? Work for free? Not earning money? Not
> earning lots of money? What is the problem with lots of big
> companies using free software and making money out of free software?
> The code is still available for you and me with the same basic
> freedoms[1]. Is that not the idea?
>
> If IBM were to put some 'paid' developers to work on eclipse, what
> would happen? what difference would it make? None. The idea is for
> the software to be available in the public domain. Who is writing
> or supporting the software is not important. If I do it because
> I am motivated or I need that software myself or that I am getting
> paid to write does not make a difference as long as the software is
> free[2].
>
> I believe it is good for the free software developers to find big
> companies showing interest in free software. It would just mean more
> and more developers will be working full time on their hobby projects
> and how can that be bad for the developers or the quality of the
> software?
>
>
> [1] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
> [2] http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
>
> --
> Morality is heard instinct in the individual.
> 	-- Nietzsche.
>
>