[sldev] ESC exempt from open source and GPL licensing?

[Taran Rampersad]

Argent Stonecutter wrote:
> Should I be? I didn't claim that the license I prefer should be given
> a privileged position. I didn't claim that it's the GPL that's
> attracting developers to the open source client. In fact, that's what
> I'm objecting to... the implication that LL is using the GPL because
> it attracts developers.
I wasn't aware that you could speak for Linden Lab.

>> Ahh, well, you don't like the GPL. In effect, the code is shared source
>
> No, it's not. It's GPL dual license.
No, there are two separate licenses. There is no such thing as 'GPL dual license'. One license is the GPL. The other is not. Effectively, for contributors who sign their rights over, it is shared source. 


>
> Hardly. The problem with GPL dual license is that it gives one player
> (Linden Labs, Trolltech, Aladdin, ... this isn't something LL just
> came up with) a privileged position. In many ways it's less desirable
> than GPL, because it doesn't provide a level playing field. Here, of
> course, a level playing field is impossible so it doesn't matter...
> you should be a lot more concerned about Qt or Ghostscript.
Thank you for informing me what you think I should be concerned about. I will take it under advisement.

>
>> Its difficult to say that you're right or wrong when you generalize
>> using 'most' and 'more'.
>
> It's what I believe. 
Belief and fact are separate things. I respect your beliefs but I want facts. I have not generalized and said 'most', 'more' or 'all' developers. I recognize and respect the decisions of others. But this is misting the issue. This is not what I am here about.

> I released my first open source software around 1980. I've been doing
> this since before GNU was a twinkle in Stallman's eye. If the
> project's useful and the code is good, people will use it and
> contribute to it, no matter what the license is. 
That is your experience, Argent Stonecutter. I am curious what this project is that happened before GNU was a twinkle in Stallman's eye. What license did it use? It couldn't have been the GPL if what you say is true - so what license was it? Bear in mind that public domain is not open source. 

All that aside, I do not want to sway you from your beliefs. I am simply looking for facts that will help me. So far you have provided what you may believe to be great suggestions, you have demonstrated that you believe that you know a lot about developer demographics and that you also believe that you know more about a lot of things than a lot of other people. I don't know enough to disagree or agree with you.

But all of that has nothing to do with my questions regarding Linden Lab's licensing. And thats what I'm really interested in. The FAQ is unofficial, I can't seem to find out how much a commercial license costs and I'm trying to navigate options for myself and clients. If you can help me with those things, I am most certainly interested.

-- 
Taran Rampersad

http://www.knowprose.com
http://www.your2ndplace.com

'Making Your Mark in Second Life: Business, Land, and Money'
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/9780596514174/

Pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/knowprose/

"Criticize by creating." — Michelangelo
"The present is theirs; the future, for which I really worked, is mine." - Nikola Tesla