I believe many people salary is based on GPL
I myself mostly consult but sometimes really writing code.
All my work is free software related.
--
Ori Idan
On 5/19/07, Oren Held <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No. I just wonder who's salary is actually based on his GPL code work.
I don't argue the GNU ideology now, I just believe that PRACTICALLY there
are no "software houses" (or individual programmers) in Israel which produce
GPL software as their main business, and which survive and succeed for more
than 5 years.
This reason or another, I'm just saying that it doesn't work *here* as a
salary-source. In Europe & USA there are few cool GPL-code-based companies
like TrollTech, MySQL. (I don't refer to RH & SuSE as GPL-code-writers as
main business)
An Israeli example for a GPL-related-software-company that I know is Zend
("The PHP Company").
Zend produces proprietary software such as various PHP-helper-tools - as
their main business.
- Oren
Ori Idan wrote:
Do you think that GPL code means no money?
--
Ori Idan
On 5/19/07, Oren Held <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I wonder how many software programmers in Israel provide their children
> from GPL code revenues.
>
> Ori Idan wrote:
>
> I did not say anything against Amos. I think he is doing the right
> thing.
> What I say is that I don't like the whole idea of propriatry software
> and that people try to find ways they can use GPL with propriatry software.
> I think the whole purpose of the GPL is to eliminate propriatry software
> and that is what we all should aim to.
>
> --
> Ori Idan
>
>
> On 5/18/07, Oleg Goldshmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "Ori Idan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > The whole purpose of the GPL is to keep software freedom. I hate
> > > all those who try to bypass the GPL and find a way to write
> > > propriatry software and bypass the GPL.
> >
> > > I usually avoid working with such companies.
> >
> > Ori,
> >
> > This is your prerogative. I would like to point out that Amos is
> > clearly not trying to bypass GPL and is in fact acting responsibly
> > trying to resolve the issue as soon as it was discovered. They are
> > trying to maintain what they perceive as commercial advantage by
> > perfectly legal means, as far as I can judge.
> >
> > If you are a current client of his company, and if you got their
> > proprietary software that links to libipq, I suppose you can demand
> > that they release their code to you under a GPL-compatible license
> > (Shlomi is right), sue for it, etc. If you are a shareholder, then you
> > may have an issue with the company not exercising due diligence and
> > catching the problem earlier.
> >
> > Amos,
> >
> > I personally appreciate that you (and I hope the decision-makers in
> > your company) are feeling uncomfortable. I don't think you should feel
> > like criminals because you want to keep your code legally
> > proprietary. I think you have asked the right question and that should
> > not make you feel uncomfortable. You real problem is lack of due
> > diligence in the past. (Well, if a customer sues you to release the
> > code then it will be a real problem, too.)
> >
> > I think you need to a) fix the problem as quickly as possible, and b)
> > apply due diligence in the future.
> >
> > --
> > Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> > http://www.goldshmidt.org
> >
> > =================================================================
> > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
> > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
>
