Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!gatech!ukma!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!tekcrl!trost
From: trost@crl.labs.tek.com (Bill Trost)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: service for gnu software
	 (was: Re: C++ 2.0 pricing and licensing policy)
Message-ID: <4294@tekcrl.LABS.TEK.COM>
Date: 12 Jul 89 16:33:50 GMT
References: <1481@ns.network.com> <8723@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <6590188@hplsla.HP.COM>
Sender: ftp@tekcrl.LABS.TEK.COM
Lines: 27

In article <1481@ns.network.com> hughs@ns.UUCP (Jim Hughes) writes:
"I would pay for that service (porting to my machine) especially
if the source is still provided. Is that against copyleft?"

Not only is that permissible under the copyleft, it is being actively
encouraged by the FSF.  The "GNU manifesto" has something to say on
the issue:

"Meanwhile, the users who know nothing about computers need handholding:
doing things for them which they could easily do themselves but don't know
how.

"Such services could be provided by companies that sell just hand-holding
and repair service.  If it is true that users would rather spend money and
get a product with service, they will also be willing to buy the service
having got the product free.  The service companies will compete in quality
and price; users will not be tied to any particular one.  Meanwhile, those
of us who don't need the service should be able to use the program without
paying for the service."

Michael Tiemann (the author of g++) has been talking about starting a
GNU support company in the spirit described above.  And, from the
various comments around this newsgroup, it sounds like finding someone
to get that done _now_ would be no problem.
Bill Trost, Tektronix Laboratories
trost@tekcrl.labs.tek.com / tektronix!tekcrl.labs!trost
(trost@reed.bitnet, but probably tektronix!reed!trost)