One thing I hate above almost anything else is when a vendor tells you what you can and can't do with your software. That drives me bonkers. Sure, they wrote it and it's theirs to do with as they wish, but once they sell/give it to me, it's mine to do with as I see fit - within the confines of the software itself.
Full story »
http://www.raiden.net –
Category: Community Tags:
- Login to post comments
akf
16 years 12 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago
some mistakes
All in all it's a good article, but there are some mistakes in it.
[FOSS] “I'm free to use it in whatever way I want (except making a profit from selling it)”
Wrong. Sure you are allowed to make a profit from selling it. RedHat is not a charity.
“The only thing I'm required to do is, if I make changes to the code, I have to share those changes with everyone else.”
That one is often misunderstood.
With the GPL you are always required to make the source code available when you make binaries available, whether you made changes or not. A written offer is sufficient, but that's not the point.
motters
16 years 12 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago
Name and shame
The article refuses to name the particular software or company involved, but I think that companies which treat their customers badly really ought to be named and shamed for this kind of practice. Negative publicity can make companies change their ways sometimes. There ought to be lists on the internet of companies which put kill switches into their software.
My advice if you really have to buy proprietary software for a business is to treat the software licence as negotiable and have the supplier agree to remove any terms which you don't agree with, or refuse to deal with them otherwise. If you're going to use the software long term you really should be asking questions such as "will I still be able to use this version of the software in 5 years time?". But really it's better to avoid the problem altogether by not using proprietary software to begin with.
uslacker
16 years 12 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago
No...
From the article:
"Sure, they wrote it and it's theirs to do with as they wish, but once they sell/give it to me, it's mine to do with as I see fit - within the confines of the software itself."
That's probably not what the license says. It may be what you would like it to say, but just wishing it doesn't make it true.
And one more thing. I notice that the writer managed to drop the name of the "evil" Microsoft but didn't mention the actual vendor. voted down for being disengenous and more MS baiting.
\\uslacker