Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
>
> Well, the problem with software-as-service is that more and more
> software is moving in that direction. Google, to mention the villain
> du jour,
Cute.
> You take our free code, you have to give back free code. It seems
> fair to me, but not to Google.
Uhm, that is a gross oversimplification. You use software you have the
right to the source. If you *choose* to release software *to others* they
have right to the source.
Hate to break it to you but I use FOSS all the time for my private and
personal use as well as my professional use. There is code I have that will
not ever be redistributed and as such you, nor anyone else, has right to that
source because you will never, EVER use it. That is my choice. On the other
hand if I did release it for others to use I would obligated to release the
source along with it. An obligation I have fulfilled on all the software I
have chosen to release for others to use.
They haven't released it for others to use. They're under no obligation
to share the source. That's not a loophole. That's freedom.
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream?
PGP Key: 1FC01004 | And dream I do...
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature