[OT] New pricing

[David Bovill]

Yes Kay - I think you are right. This is a sort of unintended bug in the
GPL - some purist like the bug because it puts pressure to keep platforms
open - but it damages and confuses the situation with regard to open code.

On the other hand RunRev may have factored this into their business plan (I
would have :) - and though I doubt they will want to "complain" to Apple
and ask them to take down the app - they could do, AND it would be in their
short term commercial interest to, because as it stands it is a major
incentive to get the commercial license.

It would be interesting to get RunRev's take on this - have they become
FOSS purists :)



On 8 April 2013 13:06, Kay C Lan <lan.kc.macmail at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 2:50 AM, Richard Gaskin
> <ambassador at fourthworld.com>wrote:
>
> >
> > If Apple has recently changed their policies so they no longer have the
> > distribution limits that had made it incompatible with the GPL, that
> would
> > be welcome news. But I wasn't able to turn up any info suggesting that,
> so
> > the items in the Wikipedia article you linked to seem to be
> > well-intentioned people who simply don't follow the news from the FSF,
> and
> > Apple staff who apparently have a tough time keeping up with the
> > ever-changing and inconsistently-applied rules there.
> >
> > Richard,
>
> Of all the contributors on this List I consider your comments the most
> reasoned, level headed and open minded, but I must have missed something.
>
> I read your links 1 and 3, cause I'm and odd sort of guy, and all I
> concluded from it was that it was GPL participants (VLC coders in one case)
> that requested Apple remove certain GPL software, and Apple complied
> because it was cheaper and easier than going to court over it. As you say,
> Apples inconsistently-applied rules, to me do NOT seem to specifically
> target rejection of GPL software.
>
> As far as I can tell LiveCode Community will allow me to write an iOS app
> and as long as it includes stick figures and fart noises it is likely to be
> approved by the App Store reviewers. For my part, in accordance with the
> GPL I would include a link where anyone could download the 'source' stack
> for their own modification. At which point, as long as I, Runrev, or
> someone from this List does not complain to Apple, then it's likely to live
> a long and highly ignored life at the App Store.
>
> As for the Apple restriction that the FSF are so concerned about, it seems
> to be splitting hairs and shooting oneself in the foot. Again, if I follow
> the GPL, and I link to the source stack, then that means anyone can
> download and play with as many copies as they wish. Just because they don't
> come as compiled installed apps seems to be a very very fine point. There
> are plenty of Source Forge projects out there that don't have an OS X
> complied version available, the only option is source code and compile it
> yourself. If I was splitting hairs I'd say the GPL doesn't say 'compiled'
> program, but just program. Apple's own restriction doesn't prevent anyone
> from obtaining the source code and working with it unrestricted to their
> hearts content .The only people the Apple restriction is going to effect is
> end users who need a compiled app and have no clue about programming and
> are never going to contribute to a FSF project in their life.
>
> Is that really detrimental to the FSF cause? Obviously from the articles,
> some GPL software contributors think so.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>