Winpdb - A Platform Independent Python Debugger Copyright and Delayed Release
Ever since I discovered Free Software I was haunted by the problem of developing software sustainably. Today I would like to suggest a possible model which may be suitable to individual developers and small business. That is, distributing software using relaxed non Free Software license, combined with releasing each modification as Free Software a determined time after its introduction, or in other words - Delayed Release.
This approach may be inline with views expressed by Richard Stallman in an interesting article on Copyright by the title “Misinterpreting Copyright—A Series of Errors” (1). Referring to copyright on software he writes “In my own field, computer programming, three years should suffice”. Stallman does not reject copyright as a concept but is interested in “Finding the right bargain”.
Possibly the most well known scheme for developing Free Software profitably is that of charging for related services. The problem is this model requires business skills most software developers do not have and is often not even applicable.
With Delayed Release, software developers may have easier time developing Free Software profitably, leading to increase in production of Free Software. Once people find that ideals of Free Software can practically co-exist with their realities, those ideals will have easier time spreading.
(1) http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.html
From memory, Crossover Office does a similar thing with Wine: adding proprietary additions to Wine, and then progressively releasing them. I’m not sure if all of their additions are released, though.
I think you should write a longer essay about this idea. I haven’t understood what you meant by it. What do you mean ‘modifications’? Do the developers guarantee that modifications will be open-sourced? I hope you have time to describe how your idea will work in detail.
Jonathan,
Crossover Office is according to their wording “a core of free Wine wrapped by various proprietary utilities that make the product commercial-grade and consumer-friendly.” - http://www.codeweavers.com/services/wine/
They declare to release all improvements of Wine but say nothing similar regarding the proprietary components.
BTW, there is a curious thing with their license as it states CrossOver includes the GPL installer Loki. I wonder if this can be done legally, though I assume it has been reviewed by their lawyer - http://www.codeweavers.com/products/truth_in_advertising/license/
This is the model that Artifex Software used for many years, almost twenty, with Ghostscript. The proprietary version was Aladdin Ghostscript and the free & libre version was GPL Ghostscript. GPL-G lagged behind Aladdin-G by 1 year or about two revisions. Artifex has moved away from that model now. I’m not sure why, but my presumption is that after two decades the business side was well enough established that it could forego the overhead of managing two streams. Here is an interview with L. Peter Deutsch, the author of Ghostscript and proprietor of Artifex Software, from 1998: http://devlinux.org/deutsch-interview.html
matt,
Interesting interview - thanks for sharing.
Seems Peter Deutsch reached this scheme coincidentally because of a personal promise to Stallman to release Ghostscript as GPL. By using AFPL on the latest two revisions, he was able to commercialize with Printer manufacturers.
Those printer manufacturers could legally use the “year-old” GPL versions but preferred to license the latest AFPL version for a fee.
This indicates this approach can be effective!
BTW, the interview includes several gems, for example when Deutsch gives his prediction on the result of a back then hypothetical event of Netscape releasing their browser as Free Software. Excellent read.