Subject: Re: Redistribution constraint
From: "Andrea Chiarelli" <a.chiarelli@manthys.it>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:42:39 +0200

> Ian Lance Taylor scripsit:
>
> > > The principles we want to follow are:
> > >
> > > 1. we want to provide the software as the result of a consulting
activity
> > > (we don't sell the software but our work)
> > > 2. we want to avoid that the software be sold
> > > 3. who wants to make profit with the software must add something and
may be
> > > paid just for this addition(new functionalities, training, etc.)
> >
> > Sadly, these principles are not open source (principle 1 is OK, but
> > not numbers 2 and 3).
>
> Not only that, but unless you want to get into the business of regulating
> the price other people charge (how many lire per line of added code?),
> there is nothing to prevent people from making a trivial change and then
> charging whatever their customers are willing to pay.  In the long run,
> trying to prevent the resale of software by direct legal means is
> hopeless, in addition to being a bad idea.


Ok. This is a practical issue that actually generates some problems.

But from a "philosophycal" point of view, what about my previous comment on
the Free Distribution term of the Open Source Definition? Does it refer to
the software as "a component of an aggregate software distribution" or to
the software as single element?

Andrea Chiarelli