9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jack Johnson <knapjack@gmail.com>
To: corey@bitworthy.net,
	Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] license situation and OSI
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 12:28:54 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTilrfM0-vAxvD0-GgKk6HihiWUaSAEflXYhyQzCs@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201005261308.48428.corey@bitworthy.net>

On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Corey <corey@bitworthy.net> wrote:
> No doubt - MS and FSF are clearly in the same camp. Allies even! Heck,
> one might even go so far as to venture the notion that they're practically
> bedfellows.

I'm just noting that usually licensing is looked at as a continuum of
commercial vs free, and rarely as restrictive vs non-restrictive (or
heck, complex vs simple), and occasionally it's useful to consider the
other dimensions and how the particular perspective of each unique
beast affects the conversation and analysis.

So, for me, it's intriguing that in both the scenario where you want
to retain complete IP control over your code and the scenario where
you hope to ensure complete IP public longevity, the best defense
seems to be restrictive licensing.  But, from the perspective where
you have public code and want to garner mindshare, there are a
multitude of facets that affect that choice, and having a multiplicity
of licensing options may improve the fecundity/fidelity/longevity of
said code in more complex ways than can be readily surmised from the
previous perspective.

-Jack (continuing to contribute nothing to the good of the order)



  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-26 20:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-26  8:37 staalmannen
2010-05-26  9:55 ` EBo
2010-05-26 12:03 ` Anthony Sorace
2010-05-26 12:42   ` Charles Forsyth
2010-05-26 15:57     ` Jack Johnson
2010-05-26 17:24       ` Nick LaForge
2010-05-26 19:57         ` Jack Johnson
2010-05-26 20:08           ` Corey
2010-05-26 20:28             ` Jack Johnson [this message]
2010-05-26 20:42               ` Corey
2010-05-27  3:10     ` Anthony Sorace
2010-05-26 18:50 ` Russ Cox

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=AANLkTilrfM0-vAxvD0-GgKk6HihiWUaSAEflXYhyQzCs@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=knapjack@gmail.com \
    --cc=9fans@9fans.net \
    --cc=corey@bitworthy.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).