Open source, closed source, and the value of code
ebeugelaar at gmail.com
Tue Mar 1 10:12:11 CET 2016
I have read most of this message thread too and for me personal this discussion is not about licenses etc.
In my opinion this discussion fired up just because of MONEY (no news btw) and emotions (Apple/Hypercard/LiveCode).
Enterprise users of LC will not have any problem to pay up to 999$/year license costs or even more if it is benefitting their businesses.
So, it seems that a lot of users who bought LC before the community editions seems to be anxious to decide within a couple of months to pay again 499$/year locked license costs beside of the costs they maybe have spent already to follow academies and buying extensions in the past. Maybe because of feelings they miss all the new features of LC? I don’t know.
For me it is important if it is really so easy to develop new called widgets in LCB in the future. If it is like Xamarin that you will need to know both API’s of targeted platforms I just go on with native programming as I do now unfortunately.
For me personal I bought a complete license of 5.5 in 2012 I guess because of the ‘develop 10x faster’ slogan but this maybe the case if you develop only cross-platform DESKTOP applications which LC does very good but to develop cross-platform MOBILE apps with LC is for me another story beside of the nice IDE of LC.
To spent 999$ by the time I think the product 8.x is mature, I will take a look again if LC is a time killer in cross-platform MOBILE development and if so, I will not have any problem to pay 999$/year.
Sent from Matwetwe <http://www.about.me/beugelaar>
On 01/03/16 09:07, "use-livecode on behalf of Mark Waddingham" <use-livecode-bounces at lists.runrev.com on behalf of mark at livecode.com> wrote:
>Usual IANAL terms apply :)
>On 2016-03-01 06:21, Monte Goulding wrote:
>> My reading of this is that any content embedded in a stackFile should
>> be licensed under the GPL. I could be wrong as I’m also not a lawyer!
>> I would have thought that the spirit of the license that it applies to
>> everything the application requires to function.
>Whilst the GPL can be used to cover content there are more (GPL
>compatible) suitable ones. The main problem with applying the GPL to
>content is deciding what constitutes the 'source code'. Indeed, I
>believe there is an FAQ on the FSF site about such things but I can't
>find it at the moment (slow internet connection on a train!). Generally
>the Creative Commons style licenses are far better for content - you
>just need to pick a variant which is definitely compatible with the GPL
>(CC/0, for example).
>> To be honest I’m unclear if there are grey areas about loading content
>> at runtime from external files. It may be only OK to license
>> differently under certain conditions like publicly documented file
>> format reader/editors???? I don’t know about that but it would have
>> seemed to be an easy workaround for Wordpress themes if it were
>> possible to license the php part GPL and the images and CSS etc under
>> some proprietary license. Like I said though, I’m not a lawyer!
>There are no gray areas here. The GPL is self policing in terms of what
>it requires of the distributor of a GPL licensed work. When you convey a
>work under the GPL you have to ensure you can supply everything to the
>receiver to enable them to reproduce the work with or without
>modifications. If you attempt to ship (say) an app where the code is
>under GPL but the content files are under a proprietary license you (as
>distributor) are violating the GPL yourself as the receiver is then not
>able to reproduce the work with any modifications they might wish to
>A similar situation (as far as I understand it) covers someone giving
>you C source-code (say) for a compiled GPL app they are distributing,
>but not providing the build files that they used to build it (the
>receiver has to be able to recreate what they received); or using some
>sort of code obfuscation process on any of the source files which they
>distributed (the receiver has to be able to modify the code effectively
>if they wish).
>Mark Waddingham ~ mark at livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
>LiveCode: Everyone can create apps
>use-livecode mailing list
>use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
More information about the use-livecode