[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Mon, 2003-03-24 at 16:38, Bill Wilson wrote: > from bill@xxxxxxxx > > I am a firm believer in open source but there is a fundemental > misunderstanding when discussing developing larger scale software. Would it be possible to fork the project at all, releasing some of the source code under the GPL, with a different name, and continuing to maintain a more full featured proprietary version? > So we either have to charge for the product or build faults in so that > customers need support. Given these choices we choose to charge for > the product and produce good quality software. > > Currently to go somway towards open source we are offering Mobius free > of Ylem licence fees and charge for installation training and support > if the customer wants support. I have serious concerns over > publishing 6 million pounds worth of code if its ripped off I cant > afford to sue a large company. Bill, have you thought about dual licensing Mobius at all, if I understand it correctly both MySQL and Trolltech (QT libs as used by KDE) have had some success in distributing their software on a dual license basis. However given the amount of investment that you have put into Mobius if you did want to use dual licensing you would probably want to use a license rather more restrictive than the standard GPL and BDS licenses. > Microsoft are now a competitor with Great Plains and Navision so we > have an uphill struggle with marketing against the big guns. I had heard that this was the case from a friend of mine who is a freelance Navision developer, especially as MS might well try to keep a tighter leash on the developer/consultants than Navision ever managed. > This is a dilema we all have to solve if we want the majority of > software to be open source. > > Thanks for the input and keep the ideas coming in I am not closed to > any suggestions as to how we can all solve this issue. Well, while having all software released with an open source license is obviously the ideal, however I can see that this isn't likely to occur in the near future, and there should be room for proprietary software in the linux world, especially for specialised products like Mobius. Outcry against people who for reasons of their own cannot or will not release their software under an open source license isn't exactly helpful, as it gives the anti-open source groups ammunition to use against the movement, and could scare off companies thinking of switching to and open source solution from their expensive proprietary UNIX or Windows solution. > -- James jamesk[at]beeb[dot]net "Write a wise saying and your name will live forever." Anonymous
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part