The third GPLv3 draft

Posted Mar 31, 2007 23:33 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (guest, #1954)
In reply to: The third GPLv3 draft by sepreece
Parent article: The third GPLv3 draft

For me to consider it fair, the cost has to be similar

If people voluntarily pay $100 for object code and $10,000 for source code, it looks pretty fair to me: the source code is obviously quite valuable, and each user gets what he paid for. The just-users customers would be pretty happy not to be charged the value of the source code.

I'm not suggesting this as a way for manufacturers to gouge the consumer or to hide their changes to the code, just as an option that the consumer might prefer.

In order for GPL authors to get what they want in exchange for their work, they have to make things unfair and penalize some users.

A GPL author's goal is a lot like that of a legislator passing a product safety or minimum wage law: greater public good at the expense of some individual good deals.

The idea is to eliminate competition (remember that consumers normally compete with other consumers, not with producers). As long as I'm willing to take object code only, that puts economic pressure on you to do the same. But if through the magic of GPL, an author can prevent me from taking object code only, then the distributor has only two choices: give both you and me object and source code or given neither of us anything. In many cases, the former is the more profitable route for the distributor. It's a big win for you, and, the argument goes, it's a pretty small loss for me -- just a slightly more expensive product.