Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
Banshee Amazon Store disabled in Ubuntu 11.04 by Canonical (Network World)Banshee Amazon Store disabled in Ubuntu 11.04 by Canonical (Network World)Posted Feb 16, 2011 18:54 UTC (Wed) by pebolle (guest, #35204)In reply to: Banshee Amazon Store disabled in Ubuntu 11.04 by Canonical (Network World) by ewan Parent article: Banshee Amazon Store disabled in Ubuntu 11.04 by Canonical (Network World)
> Clearly this is one of those things that you're allowed to do within the
> terms of the licence, but you'd have to be quite a bastard to think it's a > reasonable way to behave towards people.
I happen to think this is reasonable behaviour, simply because it respects the Banshee license. So could you please elaborate why the fact that I have that opinion validates calling me, and others that have a similar opinion, names?
(Log in to post comments)
Banshee Amazon Store disabled in Ubuntu 11.04 by Canonical (Network World) Posted Feb 16, 2011 20:41 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Just because something is legal does not mean that it is right.
Banshee Amazon Store disabled in Ubuntu 11.04 by Canonical (Network World) Posted Feb 16, 2011 23:05 UTC (Wed) by pebolle (guest, #35204) [Link]
Yes, that seems generally accepted. (The reverse seems also widely accepted: not everything that is illegal is wrong.)
What I'm puzzled about is that people apparently feel strongly about this situation. I thought it was well established that one may try to earn money with free software that one has not written. More to the point, I don't think there's any (moral) obligation to share the money one does earn that way with those that did write that free software. I'm pretty sure that licenses that add such an obligation (and thus make it a legal obligation) would be considered non-free.
So what exactly is the issue here?
Banshee Amazon Store disabled in Ubuntu 11.04 by Canonical (Network World) Posted Feb 18, 2011 17:59 UTC (Fri) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link] So what exactly is the issue here? Isn't the issue a bit like the situation where you find that the money in the tip jar doesn't go to the people who gave the bulk of the service in a transaction, but to their boss/manager?
|
|||||||||||||