To truly serve this purpose, it should be licensed royalty-free to anyone who either doesn't file for patents on software or things which are not genuinely novel, or who licenses all such patents in a similar defensive manner. It should not matter whether the software is Linux or not, or even whether it is open or not (people should have the right to license their software as they choose, even if many of us (myself included) prefer open software.
I agree 100%. My comment about OpenSource was because I generally see that code as the most open to attack from those who currently HAVE large patent portfolios for several reasons: 1) They are usually not funded by large companies with large defensive patent portfolios 2) They generally (but far from always) tend to be more ambitious then a similar closed source project (provided, again, that they are not being funded by a corporation with either deep pockets, or big goals) 3) They are providing their source code which could theoritically be examined by the Patent holder for infringment that might not be readily noticable from a binary executable.
This wasn't ment as a 'Open Source or Death' comment, rather I felt that Open Source was the area that could benifit the most from something like a 'Free Patent Orginization'. Surely others who either have no patents, or else, are using them only for defensive purposes should be entitled to access, but the question of how to license it becomes important (I see lots of potential for abuse if we're not careful).
As for the content of the patent, running an OS as a process of another OS is nothing new, and making the host OS a real-time OS is, IMAO, an obvious extension of that concept.
I agree. It may not seem that 'novel' to us, but then, neither did Amazons 'one-click shopping'. Don't think of it as "If you can't beat them join them", rather think "If those are the current rules, I'll try my darndest to change them, but in the meantime, if they are going to exploit the rules and I don't, then one of us is going to have an advantage, and it won't be me." Maybe the granting of this 'obvious' patent will prompt some of the big companies to cry foul which may make enough people review the whole process (I doubt it but its nice to dream).
If 'we' (the OpenSource Community) are going to have to put up with nonsense patents (LZW compression and the Gif format come to mind) then I think this is something I'm all for. Until we don't have to deal with these problems, then I think we have to take a pro-active (shudder... i think I found that word from being around management too long) view and build up our own 'patent portfolio' that we can use defensively if need be.
A better question might be "Who will control the patent?" In order to really have a defensive patent portfolio, don't we need one orginization/group who can barter with them on behalf of the collective whole? (whether they control the individual patents or not)
Now... if only a piece of software would come out of Unisys that we could Sue over:)
I've heard a lot of people talking about a boycot of the studios behind the CD-CCA and MPAA, my question is, are there any studios that are not part of this aliance, and should either not be part of a boycot, or should in fact be supported for not getting involved in this unpleasentness?
(Dreamworks is the one that got me wondering, but I don't know what their connection might be to all this)
Okay, I'll admit. Its cool to be able to go home, go through my CD collection and instantly have access to those same Songs at work (where I have a high speed connection). I do have a few problems with the service though: 1) Why would I want some company to be able to catalog what CDs I have and which I don't? (I haven't seen their privacy policy yet... but should I expect direct mail asking if I want the "Latest CD from such and such"?) 2) What about when I'm stuck behind a firewall somewhere and don't have easy access? I'd rather have a CD full of MP3's (I just finished burning one that had 15 CDs worth of music). 3) Are small volume and no-name CDs going to be available? (or am I going to have to make my own MP3s of them if I want to carry them around?). 4) How much bandwith is it actually going to take? They seem to have very little information available until you create an acount and give them your e-mail address. Something about that bothers me.
Thanks. That would make sence. If Linux didn't support the filesystem then as a programmer the first thing I would want to do if I believed I had found a way to decrypt an algorythm is produce an output file (in this case VOB) that would have two purposes. 1) Verify that I had in fact delt with the algorythm correctly (and was getting real data instead of garbage) 2) Allow me to take that output file, move it to a media Linux did handle, and work on a Viewer, before support for the DVD file-system is complete.
To me at least this makes complete sense. Of course I Am Not A Lawyer, I Am Only A Programmer:)
Do you think we _could_ have a clean room implementation of a copyrighted DVD player given all the press these DeCSS cases have been getting (especially among the technical community)?
But do they need to prove that its sole purpose was achieving interoperability or that its primary purpose was that?
If I write code for a website running Apache on Solaris, and someone else ports the code to run a website running Internet Explorer (for reasons of insanity), does that mean that the code was not written for the primary purpose of running a website on an Apache server on Solaris?
What if I got a DVD player with my Video Card (more and more common), or got a DVD player with an MPEG card?
That player must have a key, and that would theoretically give me at least one licensed 'Player Key' that I have paid for and received. Would using DeCSS be 'legal' using that key?
Okay, great, let Micros~1 release a player for linux. Its admirable that they realize it isn't going to disapear and might have a piece of a market they wish to capture (for digital media). It would be nice however if, instead of just releasing a closed source binary for x86 they either:
a) released the source (ha yeh right)
or b) released binaries at least for Alpha, G4, x86 and Sparc
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
You shouldn't be paranoid about "another Intel". You should hope they become another Intel. How nice would it be to have Intel, AMD, and Transmeta become the "Big Three" of CPU design and have them push each other to produce better, faster, and cheaper CPUs.
And cooler (pun intended)
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
1) They have not (as far as I know) released the specs to the processor, a compiler, or plan on releasing the instructions, which make fiddling with the layer (let alone replacing it) rather difficult.
2) Would constructing your own Code Morphing software (to replace theirs) violate any of Transmeta's current patents? I don't know the answer to this, but I believe they deserve most if not all of the ones they got. As far I know (and I admit I'm probably not the best referrance) they do have a unique and inovative concept.
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
They also mentioned in the presentation that one of the advantages of the way that their system works is that they had a fix within a week (from customer bug report, through testing, to fixed code sent to the customer) that they sent to a customer over the internet to correct a problem, vs. having to make changes to the actual chip design, and the time involved in that.
If the CodeMorhphing software is stored in a FlashROM chip then it might be attackable (or else it might explain the Phoenix anouncement since they may have been involved to 'lock down' write access to the ROM chip in BIOS... otherwise how could you get at it to correct it when you legitimately needed to).
If the chip is just a regular ROM chip without Flashing capability then how will they handle upgrades/bugfixes for the average user? (if neccesary?) This would imply either they (or the ultimate vendor) will have to ship chips back and forth to those who don't have burners (the majority of the users I believe), or else they'll need some way to hook in patches to the code that are loaded from 'user space'.
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
They commented at the 'Kickoff' that they would most likely not be Open Sourcing the morphing software.
They also suggested that one of the main reasons was so they could change the chips and the way things are, and the changes would be transparent to any programs that assumed they were good old x86's.
A better set of questions might be:
How long will it be before we see someone reverse engineer the Code Morphing software?
What will Transmeta's reaction be? (if its used to create, lets say a Java interface... and yes, I know they had a Java codemorphing VM running on one of the machines at the demo)
Will we see Code Morphing Viruses? (ie. viruses written either to attack the Code morphing software, or else, which attempt to either alter the code morphing software, or else run their own code directly against the processor in an attempt to circumvent the Code Morphing layer?)
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
Checkbox on Tax Returns
on
On to Mars
·
· Score: 1
What I personally would love to see is a checkbox on your Tax Return in the U.S. deciding wether or not to donate $1 to NASA.
I'm getting sick and tired of the one they have now asking if you would like to give money to support politicians getting elected, I'd rather have a choice I can stomache.
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
The papers and other media need to be made aware of the MPAA's real target, and the term "DVD viewing software" should be used whenever possible to drive the real issue home, repeatedly
A better question might be "Does the media really care?"
Unfortunately based on their recent articles I don't think so. I think most are more interested with generating sound bites, and repeating verbatem statements then in actually reporting on the news.
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
Of course this is assuming that the virus has an imediate result that someone notices. A virus that quietly replicate (we can argue over what is quiet replication) and propogate itself might be able to infect more systems before it 'triggers' (akin to those viruses targeted to go off on a particular date).
I still agree with you that the virus might be well contained compaired to an equivalent MS-DOS/WinXX virus, but that doesn't mean it couldn't affect a lot of people.
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
Hey, since BSD and Solaris x86 can run Linux Binaries does that mean that a Virus made for linux can infect those systems as a freebee?
Oh, and since there are so many distributions with files in different places, does that mean we'll see: "VirusX Originally for Corel but now ported to work with RedHat! Download it now!"
(p.s. in case you couldn't guess the above was ment as humor)
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
I agree with the sentiment, unfortunately Darwin Awards are only awarded to those people who remove themselves from the gene pool for the benifit of future generations:)
(unless they feel so forlorn over this stupidity that they kill themselves they don't have a chance:)
Now... the truth is that if it wasn't so late perhaps we could nominate them for a Beenie Award (Best contribution to Open Source software)... perhaps next year;)
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
Also, since this is in essence a discussion, quoting A.C.'s is rather futile.
Some people come out in favor of a given topic some come out against, its the nature of a discussion.
Oh... and wouldn't they have to prove that an A.C. is knowledgeable enough to represent 'the opionion of the community'? (not saying some A.C.s may not be)
How do you show something like that in the case of an anonymous comment? Its like picking some random person on the street and basing your case on their feelings.
I'm glad the judge in California seems to be more open minded then the one in New York... almost makes me want to leave the Empire State for a warmer environment;)
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
This seems (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) to be the first real 'butting of heads' between the 'Internet' and 'The Real World'. At the very least its the first time that it is effecting enough people that your average power-user cares, and is taking both an interest and a stand.
I hope it ends better than this one... but I do wonder less and less about the sentiments.
"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."
BTW... if Crusoe can support multiple Virtual Machines then if they write a morphing layer for Intel's 64bit processor then it would allow someone to run both new 64bit apps and legacy 16/32bit apps?
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
Of course by the same token, there are a fair number of Closed Source commercial products that have been dead-ended due to lack of developer support. In those cases there is even less likelyhood for bug fixes to come out.
In the OpenSource community there is always the possibility that, so long as a project is useful someone may pickup the torch and keep maintaining/developing a project beyond the point that the initial author(s) is/are involved.
Case in point would be MetaCreatations. They produce quite a number of 3D modelling/animation programs (Poser/Bryce/Painter/Ray Dream Studio). There have been recent rumors (it may be fact by now) that they are dropping support and development of all these packages in favor of a 'web-enabled' product called MetaStream (ie. producing content for a web plugin), and a 'High-End' product called Carrara. The current install base either has to pay a much bigger than usual (and for some unafordable) 'upgrade' fee to switch to Carrara (versus the modest fee charged to purchase a new version of a software they currently own), or else stick with Ray Dream Studio and any bugs that remain.
If it was OpenSource then there would be more possibility bugs being fixed even if a 'new and improved' product came out, simply because some people would both care, and have the code to do it.
Colleen:Its a black-hole. Hunter:Is that a good thing? C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion. H:Oh.. coooool.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree 100%. My comment about OpenSource was because I generally see that code as the most open to attack from those who currently HAVE large patent portfolios for several reasons:
1) They are usually not funded by large companies with large defensive patent portfolios
2) They generally (but far from always) tend to be more ambitious then a similar closed source project (provided, again, that they are not being funded by a corporation with either deep pockets, or big goals)
3) They are providing their source code which could theoritically be examined by the Patent holder for infringment that might not be readily noticable from a binary executable.
This wasn't ment as a 'Open Source or Death' comment, rather I felt that Open Source was the area that could benifit the most from something like a 'Free Patent Orginization'. Surely others who either have no patents, or else, are using them only for defensive purposes should be entitled to access, but the question of how to license it becomes important (I see lots of potential for abuse if we're not careful).
As for the content of the patent, running an OS as a process of another OS is nothing new, and making the host OS a real-time OS is, IMAO, an obvious extension of that concept.
I agree. It may not seem that 'novel' to us, but then, neither did Amazons 'one-click shopping'. Don't think of it as "If you can't beat them join them", rather think "If those are the current rules, I'll try my darndest to change them, but in the meantime, if they are going to exploit the rules and I don't, then one of us is going to have an advantage, and it won't be me." Maybe the granting of this 'obvious' patent will prompt some of the big companies to cry foul which may make enough people review the whole process (I doubt it but its nice to dream).
If 'we' (the OpenSource Community) are going to have to put up with nonsense patents (LZW compression and the Gif format come to mind) then I think this is something I'm all for. Until we don't have to deal with these problems, then I think we have to take a pro-active (shudder... i think I found that word from being around management too long) view and build up our own 'patent portfolio' that we can use defensively if need be.
:)
A better question might be "Who will control the patent?" In order to really have a defensive patent portfolio, don't we need one orginization/group who can barter with them on behalf of the collective whole? (whether they control the individual patents or not)
Now... if only a piece of software would come out of Unisys that we could Sue over
Acck... I mean "DVD-CCA" not "CD-CCA"
I've heard a lot of people talking about a boycot of the studios behind the CD-CCA and MPAA, my question is, are there any studios that are not part of this aliance, and should either not be part of a boycot, or should in fact be supported for not getting involved in this unpleasentness?
(Dreamworks is the one that got me wondering, but I don't know what their connection might be to all this)
Okay,
I'll admit. Its cool to be able to go home, go through my CD collection and instantly have access to those same Songs at work (where I have a high speed connection). I do have a few problems with the service though:
1) Why would I want some company to be able to catalog what CDs I have and which I don't? (I haven't seen their privacy policy yet... but should I expect direct mail asking if I want the "Latest CD from such and such"?)
2) What about when I'm stuck behind a firewall somewhere and don't have easy access? I'd rather have a CD full of MP3's (I just finished burning one that had 15 CDs worth of music).
3) Are small volume and no-name CDs going to be available? (or am I going to have to make my own MP3s of them if I want to carry them around?).
4) How much bandwith is it actually going to take?
They seem to have very little information available until you create an acount and give them your e-mail address. Something about that bothers me.
Thanks.
:)
That would make sence.
If Linux didn't support the filesystem then as a programmer the first thing I would want to do if I believed I had found a way to decrypt an algorythm is produce an output file (in this case VOB) that would have two purposes.
1) Verify that I had in fact delt with the algorythm correctly (and was getting real data instead of garbage)
2) Allow me to take that output file, move it to a media Linux did handle, and work on a Viewer, before support for the DVD file-system is complete.
To me at least this makes complete sense. Of course I Am Not A Lawyer, I Am Only A Programmer
Do you think we _could_ have a clean room implementation of a copyrighted DVD player given all the press these DeCSS cases have been getting (especially among the technical community)?
But do they need to prove that its sole purpose was achieving interoperability or that its primary purpose was that?
If I write code for a website running Apache on Solaris, and someone else ports the code to run a website running Internet Explorer (for reasons of insanity), does that mean that the code was not written for the primary purpose of running a website on an Apache server on Solaris?
Hmmm and if they know, are they allowed to say, or does the DMCA prevent them from sharing that knowledge? :)
What if I got a DVD player with my Video Card (more and more common), or got a DVD player with an MPEG card?
That player must have a key, and that would theoretically give me at least one licensed 'Player Key' that I have paid for and received. Would using DeCSS be 'legal' using that key?
Okay, great, let Micros~1 release a player for linux. Its admirable that they realize it isn't going to disapear and might have a piece of a market they wish to capture (for digital media).
It would be nice however if, instead of just releasing a closed source binary for x86 they either:
a) released the source (ha yeh right)
or b) released binaries at least for Alpha, G4, x86 and Sparc
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
You shouldn't be paranoid about "another Intel". You should hope they become another Intel. How nice
would it be to have Intel, AMD, and Transmeta become the "Big Three" of CPU design and have them
push each other to produce better, faster, and cheaper CPUs.
And cooler (pun intended)
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
But two things:
1) They have not (as far as I know) released the specs to the processor, a compiler, or plan on releasing the instructions, which make fiddling with the layer (let alone replacing it) rather difficult.
2) Would constructing your own Code Morphing software (to replace theirs) violate any of Transmeta's current patents?
I don't know the answer to this, but I believe they deserve most if not all of the ones they got. As far I know (and I admit I'm probably not the best referrance) they do have a unique and inovative concept.
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
Is it going to be FlashROM?
They also mentioned in the presentation that one of the advantages of the way that their system works is that they had a fix within a week (from customer bug report, through testing, to fixed code sent to the customer) that they sent to a customer over the internet to correct a problem, vs. having to make changes to the actual chip design, and the time involved in that.
If the CodeMorhphing software is stored in a FlashROM chip then it might be attackable (or else it might explain the Phoenix anouncement since they may have been involved to 'lock down' write access to the ROM chip in BIOS... otherwise how could you get at it to correct it when you legitimately needed to).
If the chip is just a regular ROM chip without Flashing capability then how will they handle upgrades/bugfixes for the average user? (if neccesary?) This would imply either they (or the ultimate vendor) will have to ship chips back and forth to those who don't have burners (the majority of the users I believe), or else they'll need some way to hook in patches to the code that are loaded from 'user space'.
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
They commented at the 'Kickoff' that they would most likely not be Open Sourcing the morphing software.
They also suggested that one of the main reasons was so they could change the chips and the way things are, and the changes would be transparent to any programs that assumed they were good old x86's.
A better set of questions might be:
How long will it be before we see someone reverse engineer the Code Morphing software?
What will Transmeta's reaction be? (if its used to create, lets say a Java interface... and yes, I know they had a Java codemorphing VM running on one of the machines at the demo)
Will we see Code Morphing Viruses? (ie. viruses written either to attack the Code morphing software, or else, which attempt to either alter the code morphing software, or else run their own code directly against the processor in an attempt to circumvent the Code Morphing layer?)
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
What I personally would love to see is a checkbox on your Tax Return in the U.S. deciding wether or not to donate $1 to NASA.
I'm getting sick and tired of the one they have now asking if you would like to give money to support politicians getting elected, I'd rather have a choice I can stomache.
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
The papers and other media need to be made aware of the MPAA's real target, and the term "DVD
viewing software" should be used whenever possible to drive the real issue home, repeatedly
A better question might be
"Does the media really care?"
Unfortunately based on their recent articles I don't think so. I think most are more interested with generating sound bites, and repeating verbatem statements then in actually reporting on the news.
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
Of course this is assuming that the virus has an imediate result that someone notices. A virus that quietly replicate (we can argue over what is quiet replication) and propogate itself might be able to infect more systems before it 'triggers' (akin to those viruses targeted to go off on a particular date).
I still agree with you that the virus might be well contained compaired to an equivalent MS-DOS/WinXX virus, but that doesn't mean it couldn't affect a lot of people.
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
Hey, since BSD and Solaris x86 can run Linux Binaries does that mean that a Virus made for linux can infect those systems as a freebee?
Oh, and since there are so many distributions with files in different places, does that mean we'll see:
"VirusX Originally for Corel but now ported to work with RedHat! Download it now!"
(p.s. in case you couldn't guess the above was ment as humor)
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
I agree with the sentiment, unfortunately Darwin Awards are only awarded to those people who remove themselves from the gene pool for the benifit of future generations :)
:)
;)
(unless they feel so forlorn over this stupidity that they kill themselves they don't have a chance
Now... the truth is that if it wasn't so late perhaps we could nominate them for a Beenie Award (Best contribution to Open Source software)... perhaps next year
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
Also, since this is in essence a discussion, quoting A.C.'s is rather futile.
;)
Some people come out in favor of a given topic some come out against, its the nature of a discussion.
Oh... and wouldn't they have to prove that an A.C. is knowledgeable enough to represent 'the opionion of the community'? (not saying some A.C.s may not be)
How do you show something like that in the case of an anonymous comment? Its like picking some random person on the street and basing your case on their feelings.
I'm glad the judge in California seems to be more open minded then the one in New York... almost makes me want to leave the Empire State for a warmer environment
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
This seems (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) to be the first real 'butting of heads' between the 'Internet' and 'The Real World'. At the very least its the first time that it is effecting enough people that your average power-user cares, and is taking both an interest and a stand.
I hope it ends better than this one... but I do wonder less and less about the sentiments.
"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."
-- Preamble to the Declaration of Independance
---------------
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
Okay, I know this was rather rapid but did anyone publish the where and when for this case?
I work about 4 blocks from the court houses in Manhatten and would definately have dressed up and wandered over if it was likely to help.
When is the actual hearing going to be?
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
Why do people insist on perpetuating this falicy?
;)
Crusoe is NOT designed to compete with Intel...
Its designed to compete with AMD
BTW... if Crusoe can support multiple Virtual Machines then if they write a morphing layer for Intel's 64bit processor then it would allow someone to run both new 64bit apps and legacy 16/32bit apps?
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
If we're the bee...
;)
does that make ESR RMS and Linus the queen bees?
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.
Of course by the same token, there are a fair number of Closed Source commercial products that have been dead-ended due to lack of developer support. In those cases there is even less likelyhood for bug fixes to come out.
In the OpenSource community there is always the possibility that, so long as a project is useful someone may pickup the torch and keep maintaining/developing a project beyond the point that the initial author(s) is/are involved.
Case in point would be MetaCreatations. They produce quite a number of 3D modelling/animation programs (Poser/Bryce/Painter/Ray Dream Studio). There have been recent rumors (it may be fact by now) that they are dropping support and development of all these packages in favor of a 'web-enabled' product called MetaStream (ie. producing content for a web plugin), and a 'High-End' product called Carrara.
The current install base either has to pay a much bigger than usual (and for some unafordable) 'upgrade' fee to switch to Carrara (versus the modest fee charged to purchase a new version of a software they currently own), or else stick with Ray Dream Studio and any bugs that remain.
If it was OpenSource then there would be more possibility bugs being fixed even if a 'new and improved' product came out, simply because some people would both care, and have the code to do it.
Colleen:Its a black-hole.
Hunter:Is that a good thing?
C:It is if you want to be compressed into oblivion.
H:Oh.. coooool.