This is what kingrat had to say:
If you don’t agree with my thinking, take this example. Say for instance someone copies Wordpress, calls it Secure Wordpress, fixes a very complicated security bug and then makes his version available for 1 million dollars. Of course, once the first copy is sold, the new owner can then make his/her copy of the code freely available. In essence, one developer could put the open source community under hostage. I guarantee the GPL license was not intended to allow something like this example to occur.
Nothing in the GPL prevents this. I can sell GPL code all I want, so long as I meet the various terms. I can even sell it for $1 million. I can sell it and only release the source code to the people I sell it to. The people who buy can release it if they want.
Granted, this makes it kind of pointless to sell for a lot, or to release only to those who bought the binaries.
Selling GPL software is absolutely fine. Red Hat makes a business of it.
There is plenty of commercial GPL software out there. You always run the risk of someone repackaging it and profiting from it. Look at the Revolution themes. They understand that someone could easily buy their software, then just sell it as their own. I guess you just have to hope that people will come to you instead, since you'll have the updates, official support, etc. How do you think WordPress started? Matt didn't come up with it himself. It's a fork from B2. If B2 charged for their software, he could have still done it. If Matt starts charging for WordPress tomorrow, I can still take the code, make whatever changes to it I desire, and sell it for my own profit. The idea is that people will still get the "real thing" from WordPress. Unless mine is better. Which of course is what happened with WordPress itself.


LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks

Reply With Quote

