Subject: Re: Successful FSBs
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 14:22:37 +0900

>>>>> "Tim" == Tim O'Reilly <tim@oreilly.com> writes:

    Tim> I have to say that if it's a *premise* of this list that free
    Tim> software is an ethical issue,

Not what I meant.  Free software is an ethical issue, but that is not
the only premise for participating in this list, nor the only reason
for being a free software business.  However, I think it pretty
unlikely that someone would choose to focus on free software as a
"core competence" unless they (a) like to handicap themselves, just to
prove they can really do it, (b) have a core competence in software
that is already free (and presumably somewhere upstream there is
a Type (c) somebody), or (c) they're doing it for ethical or lifestyle
reasons.

And I think nobody here would advocate that participating in free
software as such is ethically neutral or ethically bad.  Their
principle reason for participating need not be an ethical one.

    Tim> [...] but Jim is more fair-minded and open.

To me, "but Jim is more _ethical_" an _exact_ translation of your
statement.  YMMV.  'Nuff said?


-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
 My nostalgia for Icon makes me forget about any of the bad things.  I don't
have much nostalgia for Perl, so its faults I remember.  Scott Gilbert c.l.py