🚀 go-pugleaf

"Ilya Zakharevich" <ilya@math.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message
news:871sml$175$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to J. Clarke
> <nospam@nospam.nospam>],
> who wrote in article <38946ccc_4@news3.prserv.net>:
> > > What risk?  GPL *is* enforced against you.
> >
> > No.  It _can_ be.  It *is* only after the courts have ruled in a
specific
> > case.
>
> If you follow this logic further, then
>
>   only after the court has ruled in *your* case.

That is not carrying the logic further, that is a restatement of what I
said.  *your* case is a specific case.

> > > But how is it a
> > > disadvantage in the context of device drivers?
> > >
> > > You will need to release your source code.  So what?
> >
> > So if you want to sell your device driver commercially, and it contains
> > portions of code that are GPL protected, then the first person to buy
your
> > device driver can then give it away gratis and what happens to your
market?
>
> Market does not buy source code.  Market buys a product, which has
> many more components than source code (remember support?).  Make your
> product better than what "the first person to buy your device driver"
> can.

How much do you think it will cost to develop the device driver?  How many
sites are there that can use it?  What percentage of those sites are going
to need tech support?  That will tell you how much you have to charge.  Run
that number through a market survey and see how many of your potential
customers will pay that amount.

Now, do the same with a non-GPL version of the driver, and see which looks
to make more money.


--

---

--- John

Reply to jclarke at eye bee em dot net