- 09 Jun 2003 20:55
#14191
Okay, I just had a idea. Instead of flaky, slowly developed open-source software, why don't we make some sort of communist, collective, cooperative, call it what you will, system of software licencing. I will outline the prinicples, and add the legal jargon when I've listened to you, thought a bit more an finalised the idea.
Faults of Open Source:
- Open Source GPL is closer to anarchist ideology, BSD moreso
- Open Source splinters. An enhanced version of program x is made, and so is another... these both have improvements, yet one has to download both versions to get the improvements.
- There are often problems which go unfixed in modified programs.
- Development is slow and unfocused. Though, it still be better than commercialware
- Legal rights are hard to enforce, in fact, in the case of BSD there are few, Windows XP apparently uses borrowings from BSD Unix using a legal loophole (a programmer friend of mine told me this - I can't verify its validity).
- Open Source has a 'fix-it-yourself' attitude, something which many users can't do.
So, now we have the bad points of open-source why don't we draw up a plan a little something like this:
- You are entitled to make improvements on the source code, but may not distribute it, it will be submitted to the controller (ie. cooperative) , the original will be modified. Your modified version will be made available just for sake of interest and improvement if not good enough.
- Source code must be requested (I'm not sure about this)
- The interests of the user will be put first.
- Software can either be distributed gratis or for a fee, as allowed by the cooperative - if for a fee, programmers are rewarded for their work with a share in that year's dividend, if the program is considered viable. I am not sure about this, perhaps it would be better to set up separate cooperatives, non-profit ones that don't charge, and ones that operate of licence fees as a means of financial maintainence.
- Anyone may join the cooperative board, providing they agree with the constitution of it.
- The board will decide what to do with programs, which versions to use, what standards to adopt.
- All board members must participate in more than their own programs.
- The cooperative itself may change the software officialy, or merge code, which solves the 'program x' scenario..
So, what do you think? A good idea?
Faults of Open Source:
- Open Source GPL is closer to anarchist ideology, BSD moreso
- Open Source splinters. An enhanced version of program x is made, and so is another... these both have improvements, yet one has to download both versions to get the improvements.
- There are often problems which go unfixed in modified programs.
- Development is slow and unfocused. Though, it still be better than commercialware
- Legal rights are hard to enforce, in fact, in the case of BSD there are few, Windows XP apparently uses borrowings from BSD Unix using a legal loophole (a programmer friend of mine told me this - I can't verify its validity).
- Open Source has a 'fix-it-yourself' attitude, something which many users can't do.
So, now we have the bad points of open-source why don't we draw up a plan a little something like this:
- You are entitled to make improvements on the source code, but may not distribute it, it will be submitted to the controller (ie. cooperative) , the original will be modified. Your modified version will be made available just for sake of interest and improvement if not good enough.
- Source code must be requested (I'm not sure about this)
- The interests of the user will be put first.
- Software can either be distributed gratis or for a fee, as allowed by the cooperative - if for a fee, programmers are rewarded for their work with a share in that year's dividend, if the program is considered viable. I am not sure about this, perhaps it would be better to set up separate cooperatives, non-profit ones that don't charge, and ones that operate of licence fees as a means of financial maintainence.
- Anyone may join the cooperative board, providing they agree with the constitution of it.
- The board will decide what to do with programs, which versions to use, what standards to adopt.
- All board members must participate in more than their own programs.
- The cooperative itself may change the software officialy, or merge code, which solves the 'program x' scenario..
So, what do you think? A good idea?
- By Potemkin
- By Puffer Fish