juridical Question on software and GPL
eda-qa at disemia.com
Sat Mar 27 11:56:16 UTC 2004
Axel Schulz wrote:
> I think this is the the real "mess" of the GPL. It is the economical/commercial effect (!!!). Why should people go on and get the
software from http://www.bemme.de/ when they can download the same piece
of software from any other website (e.g. Volkers ;-)).
There are numerous reasons why one might give money for the use of a
-Quality of build (or availability of binaries). You have some
assurnace that the build you are getting works, and you don't have to
fiddle around on your own.
-Support. The money may give you support for the software, it is
perfectly fair that the original author does not provide support to
people who have not paid him any money.
-Assurance against ill-effects (quality again). Working with a company
trying to establish a reputation, you have at least some assurance that
the build you get doesn't have trojans installed and perhaps has
undergond some kind of testing program (related to quality of build).
Downloading from third-parties you can't be quite certain that the build
is proper and/or safe.
-Support of further development. Many people when they get software
they plan on using it a long time, and they would like to see that
software evolve over that time. The money to the author helps keep that
-Manuals. Everybody loves owning a manual. :)
-Update source. Very popular in Linux distributions, one pays money
simply so they have a good server to automatically download updates from.
-Certification. Many businesses may need to get software from approved,
or certified vendors (as is the case with the ISO 9000 and several
-Nice supporting assets. It is not required of the GPL that you give
supporting assets, such as Graphics, templates, or whatnot along with
the software. (This use/are of the GPL has some issues that I'm not too
More information about the Discussion