VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with Indy/Business IDE)

[John Dixon]

No Richard... it is not a limitation of the language ! You just have
a different perspective ...:-)

Richard Gaskin wrote...
'This is a limitation of English, in which "free" refers to both "gratis" 
and "libre".'
 
> To: use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Subject: Re: VLC and GPL and LC on iOS (was: Re: MergEXT now included with	Indy/Business IDE)
> From: ambassador at fourthworld.com
> Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 08:57:42 -0700
> 
> Bob Sneidar wrote:
> 
>  > On May 5, 2016, at 21:33 , Kay C Lan wrote:
>  >> Pick your license carefully - you should ALWAYS read the fine print.
>  >
>  > This is why I am always leary of people who want to change the world.
>  > The devil is always in the details.
> 
> I prefer Ludwig Mies van der Rohe's variant, "God is in the details."
> 
> Neither the invention of the GPL nor its selection among those who use 
> it is in any way accidental.
> 
> Our LiveCode community is comprised mostly of people who have decades of 
> experience using and building exclusively proprietary software.
> 
> In our milieu, the "free" in "free software" is often seen with a focus 
> on price.  But it's important to remember that the GPL expresses no 
> opinion about price at all.
> 
> This is a limitation of English, in which "free" refers to both "gratis" 
> and "libre".
> 
> With "free software", the "free" is about "libre", or "freedom", the 
> explicit freedoms granted in the license to receive source code, to be 
> able to study it, to modify it, and to share those modifications with 
> your neighbor.
> 
> There are many open source licenses. While the GPL and its derivatives 
> are the most popular, there's also the Apache License, Mozilla License, 
> Python's and PHP's unique licenses, and many others.  There's even a 
> WTFPL (see <http://www.wtfpl.net/faq/>, though be forewarned about the 
> language you'll find there <g>).
> 
> There are almost as many different open source licenses as there are 
> proprietary ones.  And like proprietary licenses, each has its own 
> unique terms and conditions.
> 
> One of the reasons the GPL has remained so popular with so many projects 
> is because of the values it represents. When your goal is sharing, the 
> GPL can be a very good choice because it ensures the sharing will 
> continue downstream, that no one can hoard the code released under it.
> 
> If that reflects your own values and your goals for a project, the GPL 
> is a widely accepted solution to make that happen for you.
> 
> But as mostly proprietary-only developers, many in our community view 
> the value of code with different goals, mostly monetary and often 
> specifically with revenues derived from per-user licensing, which 
> requires the code remain concealed from the recipient of the software.
> 
> In my own view, I see no harm in either approach.  Both have a useful 
> place.  But they do represent different models of how value is derived. 
>   While relatively few here see sharing source code as more valuable 
> than being paid to keep it secret, there are large numbers of developers 
> in other corners of the world with different goals, where the value of 
> community contributions outweighs potential license fees.
> 
> It may be tempting for those who work exclusively in proprietary 
> software to dismiss the GPL as idealistic, just as some free software 
> advocates dismiss proprietary software as user-hostile in preventing 
> users from fixing bugs or adding features they need.
> 
> Personally, I see the GPL as a very pragmatic solution when the goal is 
> proliferation.  By ensuring downstream enhancements are shared with the 
> world community, a software released under GPL can only become ever more 
> capable.
> 
> Consider the Internet that deliver this post to you.  Much of the 'Net's 
> infrastructure is run on truly free software, and most of the routers, 
> switches, and servers are running Linux.  Linux is also at the heart of 
> 80% of smartphones, 65% of tablets, most embedded devices, and 95% of 
> the world's supercomputers.  While Windows continues to dominate the 
> desktop, every other form of computing today is largely a Linux story.
> 
> This would not likely have been possible without the GPL.  But by 
> ensuring that any modifications of the software get shared back to the 
> community they came from, Linux has become adapted for a much broader 
> range of use cases than any other OS.
> 
> We can hope that over time we'll see similar community-driven 
> enhancement with LiveCode. And now that v8 is here with Builder, at last 
> we have a scriptable interface to OS APIs and object definitions 
> (Widgets).  So going forward enhancing the LiveCode experience is no 
> longer limited to those proficient in C++.  Anyone who can script can 
> extend, modify, and share.
> 
> And as a dual-licensed system, LiveCode lets us choose either GPL or 
> other licenses depending on our goals for the project at hand.
> 
> -- 
>   Richard Gaskin
>   Fourth World Systems
>   Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>   ____________________________________________________________________
>   Ambassador at FourthWorld.com                http://www.FourthWorld.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