This is nuts! I don't need no stinkin subscriptions. Ooooh Aaaah, now we can get digital radio, and pay a monthly subscription for it, what a bargain. Wait. Now we can subscribe to movie rentals, and wine, and beer, and cheese. What a concept. Get stupid people to but shiite they don't want or need. Get them to pay for stuff whether they use it or not. This is a recurring revenue model from the heavens. Its amazing to me that there are enough stupid people out there to support it. Wish I thought of it!
At least I can spell.;-) What I meant by 'derivative of the GPL' is licensing that purports to be free (you can see the source but pay me) and really isn't. United Linux HAS every right to require a per-seat license for their 'PROPRIETARY' pieces. If their proprietary pieces add significant value above the bundled GPL software I'm sure they will be very successful...
Licensing derivatives of the GPL that don't express and require the freedoms of the GPL are nothing more than schemes to harness and steal the creative fruits of the community by those who are only interested in personal profit. Selling support, books, training, consulting are all better ways to go than this. I have to agree with RMS.
Slashdot Mirror
This is nuts! I don't need no stinkin subscriptions. Ooooh Aaaah, now we can get digital radio, and pay a monthly subscription for it, what a bargain. Wait. Now we can subscribe to movie rentals, and wine, and beer, and cheese. What a concept. Get stupid people to but shiite they don't want or need. Get them to pay for stuff whether they use it or not. This is a recurring revenue model from the heavens. Its amazing to me that there are enough stupid people out there to support it. Wish I thought of it!
Didn't IBM already try something similar to this.. A free service as long as you sit through advertising. "Prodigy"
Would that be the 'iBong'? ;-)
I couldn't resist.
At least I can spell. ;-) What I meant by 'derivative of the GPL' is licensing that purports to be free (you can see the source but pay me) and really isn't. United Linux HAS every right to require a per-seat license for their 'PROPRIETARY' pieces. If their proprietary pieces add significant value above the bundled GPL software I'm sure they will be very successful...
Its a License, thats the intent. Every other forces a restriction and directs ownership.
Licensing derivatives of the GPL that don't express and require the freedoms of the GPL are nothing more than schemes to harness and steal the creative fruits of the community by those who are only interested in personal profit. Selling support, books, training, consulting are all better ways to go than this. I have to agree with RMS.