Subject: Re: the Free Software Movement in Industry
From: Seth Gordon <sethg@ropine.com>
Date: 27 Aug 2001 18:33:15 -0000

    > Company A is not willing to pay for development that company B could
    > later get *for free*.  However, if it saves Company A money up front,
    > it would be happy to pay for development that company B would get
    > later *for a price*.  (Assuming, of course, that the software vendor
    > is negotiating just as stiffly with B as with A.)

   [Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona:]
   Why for free? Why is the maker of the software be willing to provide
   it for free to B? In the situation you mention, only the maker and
   company A have the software. Therefore only the maker and A can
   redistribute it. You say that A is not willing to redistribute it, so
   you only left out the maker. But the maker is making a bussiness from
   selling the software. So probably is going to try to sell it to B
   too...

   Am I missing something obvious?

In that situation, company A might as well be purchasing a proprietary
software package, since none of the benefits of open-source
development apply to a product that the vendor and customer are
keeping to themselves.

-- 
"Rav would never cross a bridge when an idolator was on it; he said, 'Maybe he
will be judged and I will be taken with him.'  Shmuel would only cross a
bridge when an idolator was on it; he said, 'Satan cannot rule two nations [at
once].'  Rabbi Yannai would examine [the bridge] and cross."  --Shabbat 32a
== Seth Gordon == sethg@ropine.com == http://ropine.com/ == std. disclaimer ==