Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!jb3o+ From: jb3o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jon Allen Boone) Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss Subject: Re: Copyleftability Message-ID: Date: 24 Dec 89 19:30:19 GMT References: <8300@stiatl.UUCP> , Organization: Class of '92, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 37 In-Reply-To: raulmill@usc.edu (Raul Deluth Rockwell) writes: > In article > jb3o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jon Allen Boone) writes: > > ;> > 1) If I release good, quality software, that meets a real need, > ;> > that doesn't need lots of support (I *said* quality*), with good > ;> > documentation, then why on earth would people buy it if they > ;> > could get it free? > > ;> This seems highly unlikely. Not to cast dispersions on your > ;> programming abilities, but even most *commercial* software needs > ;> support - and very *few* have good documentation. So it is > ;> unlikely that you will not be able to make some money at > ;> consultation. Second, there is nothing that *forces* people to pay > ;> you now. It only takes on person to buy the software so that it > ;> can be pirated - most people i talk to in day-to-day conversation > ;> do not pirate software because they feel that the programmers > ;> deserve compensation. > > So what I want to know is: where do these pirates get their support? > I mean, documentation is often harder to copy than the binaries. Well, the pirates i knew didn't *use* most of the software they had - they simply traded it. As for the pirates in the business world, one set of docs, an office copier or laser printer on the lan and instant docs for everyone who wants a copy..... > You can argue both sides of the fence, but in this case I'm not sure > that what you are saying is comprehensible. well, i comprehend it.....what don't you understand...send me mail...i'll try my best to make it comprehensible...(gee, i guess i even need to *support* my postings...mabye i should charge...) - iain