[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Intellectual Property II
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
Re: Intellectual Property II |
Date: |
Wed, 04 Jan 2006 20:25:48 +0100 |
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
[...]
> RHEL: over 1500 EUR for subscription
They charge for per seat "services" (mostly bug fixes delivery), not
GPL'd software as IP. That monetization model fails with stable high
quality software (vendor lock-in through certification of other stuff
for not-quite-so-free-as-in-speech-or-beer binaries under trademark
and per seat service contract protection "as a whole" aside for a
moment), and it isn't suitable for ethical software providers who
offer bug fixing for free-as-in-beer until at least Withdrawal from
Marketing to begin with. You should read and try to understand the
complaint, really.
regards,
alexander.
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/01/04
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/01/04
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/01/04
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2006/01/04
- Message not available
- Re: Intellectual Property II,
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2006/01/04
- Message not available
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/01/04
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/01/04
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2006/01/04
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2006/01/04
- Message not available
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/01/04
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2006/01/04
- Re: Intellectual Property II, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2006/01/04
Message not available