[linux-audio-dev] New form of GPL licence that protects Linux from proprietary world [was: New powermacs?]

[Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano]

> Software would remain open-source. But the assumption is if you are
> willing to part with the freedoms Linux and other GNU OS's offer, and
> pay for a costlier system, as well as a bunch of shrink-wrapped apps,
> then you might as well pay for the oss apps and help the oss community.
> No one would switch to Apache in the first place were it not better than
> the closed-source solutions. By the same token if I have a killer audio
> app, they would either pay for it for their OS or switch to Linux or any
> other oss OS and enjoy the freedom. It's a bit pushy tactics, but that's
> exactly what our competition is doing, and doing it rather well.

Do we want to _become_ what our "competition" is? I don't think so. I
don't like pushy tactics. We are (by some measure) successsfull because
we are not like the "competition".  

> > you don't put a 'no gurls allowed' sign on your clubhouse and then
> > complain about how no hot chicks ever show up. (ohhh that was probably
> > offensive, but i think it's a fantastic metaphor ... for something).
> 
> Wrong analogy. To use your context (as funny as it seems :-), I would
> put 'no gurls allowed without paying' on a clubhouse that has a
> covercharge. Then, next to it would be a clubhouse that is free for both
> boys and girls. Pop quiz: Where would the girls go?

[just to keep banging on a bad analogy :-] My guess is that they would
go to the one that is "cool" (whatever is cool at the moment). If the
one that is not free is the one where the "cool" crowd hangs out, they
will pay. And you will have a free but empty clubhouse (well, not really
empty, a few geeks will be there talking about cool software... and yes,
I would end up there as well :-). Of course it might also happen that
the cool clubhouse is the one that is free, but don't take that as a
given. 

Anyway, I don't think acceptance of the os will ever come from twisting
arms. Users will use the os that meets their need. Actually, most users
will use the os that comes with the machine they bought. Tying the use
of a free cool app to running it in the free operating system so that
users will switch will not work (I think). If the os they use does not
come with the coolest tools (BTW, their idea of cool may be different
from ours), and they are not available in "free" versions because of
licensing issues they will just not use them and will use whatever else
is available (free or not).

-- Fernando