On Fri, Sep 13, 2002 at 08:55:18PM +0200, service@metamodul.com wrote:
Its looks like that i was not precise enough.. The GPSA - General Public Support Agreement - is a business contract and not a license. I have thoughts about a GPSA License but these thought are at a pretty early state.
Well, my comment was about the GPSA License which was explicitely mentioned as one option, as an alternative to the GPL.
The description of the GPSA (I understand it is not available yet) indicates that it would not be a free software license. I think that it is quite strange that a web site describing a business contract and business model for free software companies describes a non-free software license as an alternative to the GPL.
I can not say if the business model you describe is feasible or not -- I don't know enough about economics to comment on it. But I can tell you that the description of the GPSA license (not the business model) is in violation of the fundamental freedoms that the GPL aims to protect.
You might want to study http://www.gnu.org/philosophy and make sure that your ideas and business models are compatible with the word and the spirit of free software. And you might want to remove the description and the references to the GPSA on the web site to prevent any potential misunderstanding. This would then make it clear that your concern is about a free software business model (with the focus on free).
Thanks, Marcus