Re: business models [was patent stuff]

[Eric W. Biederman]

Larry McVoy <[e-mail]> writes:

> Jumping on the chance to cause more discussion...  This probably ought to
> be off on some other list, but I don't know what that is.  Alan will be 
> sending out the guards to herd me back into the ward, but I've escaped
> for the moment and I'll make the best of it :)
[snip]
> If you hold the "It's GPL or bugger off" position, people will figure out
> how to work around it and it is virtually certain you won't like what they
> do.  If you offer them some sort of reasonable compromise, I'll bet they
> take it.  If you don't, you get to live with whatever their nasty evil
> business minds dream up.

To a certain extent other people's business model is none of your
business.  The only people who have a reasonable right to ask that
question is the company itself, and it's investors.  And support is
far from being the only viable GPL compatible business model. 

Most new businesses fail, even when they are using known proven
business models.  It is execution, and being in the right place at the
right time that make a successful company. 

For the GPL or bugger off folks, unless you have a business model
that delivers GPL'd code to them, you don't make any money from them.
Not offering them the GPL violates ``The customer is always right''.
Of course it is perfectly fine to concentrate on those people who you
can figure out how to make money from.

There is only one test for a successful business model, is the company
here making money 20 years from now.  That test is going to take a
while.

Eric