Posted Nov 8, 2010 23:21 UTC (Mon) by khim
In reply to: FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core"
Parent article: FSFLA: Linux kernel is "open core"
"Open core" is a specific business model based on keeping part of the code proprietary and forcing users to pay you for its use.
This is quite novel idea, indeed. Can you, please, cite respactable source which says that you must "force users to pay" to qualify for "open core" label? I was under impression that things like Google Chrome (which includes proprietary Flash plugin and PDF reader plugin) are perceived as "open core" - even if Google distributes it for free.
Linus does the same thing with Linux. We can discuss if it's good thing or bad thing (I personally think it's good thing) but it's "open core" by any sane definition.
to post comments)