Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
From: Marco Monteiro <masm@acm.org>
To: David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20030103161652.AAA2625@shell.webmaster.com@whenever>
References: <20030103161652.AAA2625@shell.webmaster.com@whenever>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: 
Message-Id: <1041611842.1156.94.camel@fly>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: 03 Jan 2003 16:37:22 +0000
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2945
Lines: 68

On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 16:16, David Schwartz wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 12:51:04 +0000, Andrew Walrond wrote:
> 
> >Yes but....
> 
> >I develop computer games. The last one I did took a team of 35 people 2
> >years and cost $X million to develop.
> 
> >Please explain how I could do this as free software, while still feeding
> >my people? Am I a bad person charging for my work?
> 
> >Really - I want to understand so I too can join this merry band of happy
> >people giving everything away for free!
> 
> 	You can't with the GPL, because it presents you with a "take it or leave it" 
> package deal. But you could with a different license.
> 
> 	What you do is you base your game off of whatever open source code gets you 
> the furthest. The game itself, of course, is closed source. After your first 
> few months of sales, you contribute some of the code you wrote back to the 
> open source community. 
> 
> 	Why shouldn't you? It hurts you not one bit and it's free publicity. Heck, 
> after a few year, maybe you open source the whole game.
> 
> 	The next person to write a game can start where you left off to some extent. 
> He can develop a better game for less money, and he can contribute more code 
> back to the community. Eventually, there may be enough code in the comnunity 
> to develop such complex games entirely open source.
> 
> 	However, with a license like the GPL, every game has to be developed on a 
> proprietary base. You simply can't afford to put any money into an open 
> source base. So every game has to start back from square one, or the most 
> advanced proprietary base that can be found.
> 
> 	Everybody loses except the person who makes the proprietary base or engine 
> you started with. I think working to make all software better and cheaper is 
> much more noble goal than working to arm twist other people into giving you 
> their code.
> 
> 	And the best part is, you can work to strengthen fair use, first sale, and 
> oppose the validity of shrink wrap licenses. You can argue for a narrower 
> definition of a derived work. In fact, you can at least *try* to win the 
> legal war.
> 
> 	DS
> 
> 

That is not right. The problem is that all people think that you can't
sell a game if it is Free Software. If the game is good you can. People
buy paintings and public domain classic music...
 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-- 
Marco Monteiro

"All the world's a stage and most of us are desperately unrehearsed."
	--Sean O'Casey
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/