Bob Weiner writes: > Since the very essence of Open Source is that the technology should be free > (libre) for anyone to apply to their specific needs (if others' freedoms are > not harmed), then arguing that an organization that markets OSS and therefore > seeks to spread its use more broadly is somehow unfairly exploiting others' > work is simply a non sequitor. Everybody who works with libre software should go read Eric Raymond's _Homesteading the Noosphere_ paper. http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/homesteading/index.html If he's right (and I'm not going to argue that he is; read it for yourself), then people write libre software expecting to be paid in reputation. So, free software is more of a misnomer than people think, AND it is quite possible to unfairly exploit libre software by denying the authors the proper credit. It also predicts that the most successful free software authors will have, in addition to their programming skills, an ability to market themselves to get the credit they seek. My conclusion, then, is that a marketing organization can get more free software by explicitly "paying" for its free software through increasing the author's reputation. -- -russ nelson <rn-sig@crynwr.com> http://crynwr.com/~nelson Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.