Subject:
|
Re: Parts license
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Tue, 26 Sep 2000 01:16:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1348 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> > Also, (overzealous snipping means I removed the cite by mistake) on the bit
> > about charging a nominal fee for redistribution, this is common practice.
> > Disallowing it means you are enabling freeriders. This tends to discourage
> > people from even using the stuff in the first place, as GNU has learned.
>
> Hmm. I'm not reading your tone clearly on this. I *assume* you (Larry)
> would prefer that we not specify $$$ limits on redistribution.
I think a monetary limit on a redistribution charge is better than disallowing
fees entirely, which I think is what Jacob wanted. My point is that if it
actually costs money to distribute, and you prevent cost recovery, you
discourage people from setting up distribution sites. (freeriders bankrupt
distribution sites, or "tragedy of the commons" if you prefer) I'd rather that
there be no limit on fee at all but could accept a limit before I could accept
no fee being allowd.
Minor point.
++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Parts license
|
| (...) Hmm. I'm not reading your tone clearly on this. I *assume* you (Larry) would prefer that we not specify $$$ limits on redistribution. My take: I wrote the clause in, because I figured people would want it. But I think freeriders will short (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
73 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
