Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!gatech!emory!phssra
From: phssra@mathcs.emory.edu (Scott R. Anderson)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Questions
Message-ID: <4252@emory.mathcs.emory.edu>
Date: 6 Aug 89 18:22:58 GMT
References: <115@isgtec.UUCP> <55@ark1.nswc.navy.mil>
Reply-To: phssra@emory.UUCP (Scott Robert Anderson)
Distribution: gnu
Organization: Department of Physics, Emory University, Atlanta
Lines: 26

In article <55@ark1.nswc.navy.mil> dsill@relay.nswc.navy.mil (Dave Sill) writes:
>In article <115@isgtec.UUCP> robert@isgtec.UUCP (Robert Osborne) writes:
>>3)   What ARE the *better* ways of making money from our software (assuming
>>     we don't sell it, but instead distribute it).
>
>I believe RMS' idea is that programmers should earn money doing
>consulting and supporting.

Generally, programmers should earn money for any work they do, which would
include writing software from scratch, not just supporting it.  For example,
for a small software project, a hospital would hire a programmer and pay them
for the amount of time they put in.  The hospital gets what they pay for, i.e.
a working program, and any software produced is then freely available to
others.

For a large software project such as being discussed here, a National
Institutes of Health grant or some similar funding source would be required to
pay the programmers who write the software.  This happens all of the time at
medical schools: many Radiology departments are quite busy writing their own
software, using government grants.

*
  *      **                  Scott Robert Anderson      gatech!emoryu1!phssra
   *   *    *    **          phssra@unix.cc.emory.edu   phssra@emoryu1.bitnet
    * *      * *    * **
     *        *      *  * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *