LinuxLingam wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 March 2003 06:58 am, you wrote:
>> LinuxLingam wrote:
>>> why is software not yet taxed for excise?
>>
>> Sorry, my last reply talked about *customs* on Software.
>>
>> Software is not taxed for excise because of a very simple
>> reason. Software is a service,
LinuxLingam wrote:
> dear sanjeev,
>
> thanks again, for your insights and responses.
> so your responses confirm what i had been thinking: taxation in
> absolute terms is supposed to be on the principals you
> mentioned, but the overall reality forces of democracy,
> uruguay, gatt, WTO, bring in a
On Wednesday 12 March 2003 06:58 am, you wrote:
> LinuxLingam wrote:
> > why is software not yet taxed for excise?
>
> Sorry, my last reply talked about *customs* on Software.
>
> Software is not taxed for excise because of a very simple reason. Software
> is a service, not a product. Only produc
dear sanjeev,
thanks again, for your insights and responses.
so your responses confirm what i had been thinking: taxation in absolute
terms is supposed to be on the principals you mentioned, but the overall
reality forces of democracy, uruguay, gatt, WTO, bring in a
'reality-distortion field' a
> However lets "defeatist" approach and look at the issue on its merits
s/"defeatist"/ignore "defeatist"
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe in subject header.
Check archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/ilu
On Wed, 2003-03-12 at 12:23, Richard Stallman wrote:
> What good are the proposals which won't survive a no-holds-barred discussion.
>
> If "no-holds-barred discussion" means assuming an unlikely worst case,
> that is not a fair test of any proposal.
These are usual responses that such a prop
LinuxLingam wrote:
> why is software not yet taxed for excise?
Sorry, my last reply talked about *customs* on Software.
Software is not taxed for excise because of a very simple reason. Software
is a service, not a product. Only products that are _produced_ may be taxed
for excise.
Writing sof
LinuxLingam wrote:
> understanding from you that taxation tries to be deliberately
> detached from the factors i have been mentioning, and works solely on
> the principle you mention of 'tax whatever the government can'
> popular or unpopular, at the government's sole discretion,
Yes. Remember,
dear sanjeev gupta,
thank you once again for your insightful, balanced approach and insights.
i am learning tremendously from your counter points and find them quite
stimulating, since they come to me from 'another world' i know not of yet.
understanding from you that taxation tries to be delibe
LinuxLingam wrote:
> thanks for your response. (what's your name, btw?).
Sanjeev Gupta, although the nickname ghane stuck many years back in
college.
> your response is quite insightful and made me learn and look
> from a new angle.
Thank you. I hang around with economists, bankers, and people
hi sanjeev/ghane/gupta.
thanks for your response. (what's your name, btw?).
your response is quite insightful and made me learn and look from a new angle.
On Sunday 09 March 2003 10:15 am, you wrote:
>
> Excise, Duties, and other taxation should be an instrument of fiscal
> policy, and should not
hi tarun.
thanks for your response again, to the open letter.
> Right on the point.
> 1) Stick to taxation on OEM bundled software alone and not on all FLOSS +
> COTS software.
why not all software? much simpler to implement. soon people will start
bundling software in bundles, much like micr
> In general, your comments exaggerate both the likelihood of hostile
> responses and the effect they would have if they happen. That
> approach is defeatism. Any proposal looks bad when judged in such an
> unfriendly spirit. The point is that we should not judge them that
> way.
What good are t
> Isn't that self-evident? If you have (say) an 8% excise on bundled
> software, then the person who downloads Linux and OpenOffice and
> bundles them into a computer doesn't pay any excise. After all, the
> tax/excise would be on the price of the software, and if the price is
> 0, so is the corr
> "Tarun" == Tarun Dua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The proposal actually has two facets: Excise or tax as a
>> disincentive for deploying and/or bundling proprietary
>> commodity off-the-shelf software (COTS) and as a way of
>> generating revenue for promoting FLOSS.
Ta
> The proposal actually has two facets: Excise or tax as a disincentive
> for deploying and/or bundling proprietary commodity off-the-shelf
> software (COTS) and as a way of generating revenue for promoting
> FLOSS.
How does one implement Excise/tax on COTS without hurting FLOSS ?
If both these do
Raj Mathur wrote:
> The proposal actually has two facets: Excise or tax as a disincentive
> for deploying and/or bundling proprietary commodity off-the-shelf
> software (COTS) and as a way of generating revenue for promoting
> FLOSS. I agree with the first part -- makes perfect sense to me for
> t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> "Tarun" == Tarun Dua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> first of all, an excellent response from tarun dua on the
>> draft.
Tarun> --Thanks LL
>> IMHO FLOSS is beyond any mess that any bureaucrat, government,
>> or corporate can
> first of all, an excellent response from tarun dua on the draft.
--Thanks LL
> IMHO FLOSS is beyond any mess that any bureaucrat, government, or
> corporate can make.
That is dangerous thinking!!! Look what a mess GOI bureaucrats made with
regard to Internet.
All this coz' of just a few high pro
By the way, anybody noticed more than linux-delhi or whoever,
it is really microsoft and all the non-free software companies that must push
the indian government to tax sale of software in india.
because suddenly, the government will see a nice source of huge inflow of
cash, and therefore, a rea
On Saturday 08 March 2003 02:19 am, you wrote:
> Just one question:
>
> Shouldn't we be talking/targeting about 'proprietorial'
> software, instead of 'commercial' software?
read responses to emails from tarun dua and tripta, on ilug-d.
in brief: all commercial software, sold for a p
On Friday 07 March 2003 08:43 pm, you wrote:
> On Friday 07 March 2003 03:52 pm, LinuxLingam wrote:
> > 14) finally, as a statement of leadership and values, india must
> > adopt freedom-based software that is being proposed to the UNICEF to
> > be declared as a world-culture heritage.
>
> Cite?
o
Great effort. Needs to be lauded and supported.
Comments/additions inline.
However, lets keep two issues of taxation and FLOSS separate. It may
confuse the issue and may be too much for the babus to comprehend.
I did get a reply for my mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on issuing
various smartca
tripta, thanks for your response to the draft of the open letter.
a short response to your queries:
1) companies that export software, whether free or non-free, are not being
taxed by this system. the proposal is to only tax domestic software sales.
software exports anyway happens from tax-free
On Friday 07 March 2003 07:21 pm, you wrote:
> An Opinion :-
>
first of all, an excellent response from tarun dua on the draft.
looking forward to more intense discussions on this topic by others in
linux-delhi. eager to see to what this churning leads.
short and quick responses to tarun's insig
On Friday 07 March 2003 03:52 pm, LinuxLingam wrote:
> 14) finally, as a statement of leadership and values, india must
> adopt freedom-based software that is being proposed to the UNICEF to
> be declared as a world-culture heritage.
Cite?
--
Sanjeev Gupta
I completely agree with the sentiment of the draft and at some levels agree
with it as well but before doing that we have to look at the IT industry and
it's complexities.
What the IT industry in India is suffering not only from the drain caused by
sale of `Commercial Software' but the fact t
An Opinion :-
One battle at a time -- Concentrate on OEM bundled software only.
Govt. of India is the most inefficient user of money doesn't make sense
to give them another source to waste good money over bad money.
The tax concessions on Commercial Software will hurt free software
sellers as wel
28 matches
Mail list logo
