Open source, closed source, and the value of code

[Matt Maier]

Robert, as you conduct your research you should also learn about the
difference between Free Software and Open Source Software. In brief, Free
Software does special things for moral reasons; it is "right" that software
be liberated. Open Source Software does special things for pragmatic
reasons; it is "useful" that software be easy to use without asking
permission.

In both cases, you leverage copyright law. You cannot get away from
"restrictions" and still do Free or Open Source Software. The licenses are
used to restrict licensees from closing off the source of the software (to
a greater or lesser extent).

The GNU General Public License (GPL) is not an Open Source license, it is a
Free license. For reference, here is the Free Software Foundation's stance
on Open Source
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
"...a license designed specifically to protect freedom for all users of a
program."

The GNU has a lot of restrictions because it's specifically designed to
prevent anyone who uses Free software from acting in a way contradictory to
the ideals of the Free software movement. If you want the software, then
you have to follow the terms of the license. If you don't follow all of the
terms, you lose your license and open yourself to litigation. This threat
has teeth because Free software licenses have been upheld in court. The
restrictions are the point.

It doesn't help that Livecode always uses the term "Open Source" when
referring to the Community Edition. This could easily (and does) lead
people to assume the Community Edition has an Open Source license. It
doesn't, so if you're looking for pragmatic terms, rather than idealistic
terms, you're going to be confused.

With respect to your Question 2, the Indy license doesn't have to
specifically forbid a service where someone with a freer license compiles
code on your behalf. You can't build an actual Livecode application without
using the IDE, so if you used the Community IDE your application must
adhere to the GPL. The whole point of the GPL is to prevent "free" software
from being changed into "proprietary" software.

As for Apple, they don't want hobby developers releasing apps into their
system. Apple has zero interest in letting anyone play or experiment in
their closed ecosystem. Android is the Wild West you're looking for.
Or...maybe Windows phone? They might be desperate or ambivalent enough.

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Robert Mann <rman at free.fr> wrote:

> The price rise in the commercial license has led me to try understand the
> Opens SOurce License, although I had always in my mind to keep with a
> commercial license ideally.
>
> And that leads to big surprises. I'll be doing a little bit of homework on
> that.
>
> *Question 1 :: is there somewhere a kind of WIKI place for live code whereI
> could start up open a license subject/page to be amended in a more
> structured and constructive way than that list???*
>
> Question 2 :: In that spirit, Peter TB Brett, it would be a contribution if
> could you throw in the source/ref of the terms & conditions of the indy
> license that forbids to provide the service described by J L. just above
> consisting in accompanying an author in the realm of iOs app publishing.
>
> Behing the great idea of a Open SOurce, it is surpassing to find so much
> barriers being built around it.
> And that does not seem totally realistic and respectful either.
>
> I find it hard and really surprising that such a service is not provided by
> somebody because I would find it really useful. Thinking about it, I
> actually have one project I worked upon that would greatly benefit from
> such
> a service as I just do not have time to dig and try out myself the iOs
> publishing. Frankly it just is not a thing you just do once as a hobbits to
> my view.
>
> On the indy side, i find it very intriguing that you can invest into a tool
> and be so tightly regulated as to what you can or not do.
>
> So far to go into the iOs model, you need :
> -- to do it yourself (if calling help from an indy is banned!)
> -- invest in the tool 1000 bucks, plus..
> -- invest time in trying out things with a stange spread out documentation
> here and there.
> -- deal with mister apple and the niceties & subtleties one regularly see
> in
> the forum..
>
> Mumm.. sounds great!!
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701775.html
> Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>