Subject: Re: A few here may have an opinion on this
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:35:10 +0900

>>>>> "Chris" == Chris Maeda <chrismaeda@attbi.com> writes:

    Chris> This may sound like corporate welfare, but it can generate
    Chris> huge amounts of tax revenue on the back end if the research
    Chris> is successful.

Specious.  If it's likely to generate "huge" amounts of tax revenue,
then it's also likely to generate "huge" amounts of profit, and the
private sector is much better than the government at identifying and
taking advantage of those.  So it _is_ merely corporate welfare.

This is not an argument against permissive licenses, but government
funding of proprietary software (as research) is a very bad idea.

If the government is _buying a service_ that's a completely different
matter.  Drawing the line is hard, but obviously requiring that any
product used by the government be open-sourced is far beyond what most
FSBers would consider a reasonable idea for the near to medium term.
So we do have to make the distinction.

-- 
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