[Info-vax] Any stronger versions of the LMF planned ?, was: Re: LMF Licence Generator Code

[Phillip Helbig undress to reply]

In article <serhfr$f1o$1 at gioia.aioe.org>, chris <chris-nospam at tridac.net> writes:

>  Even Oracle make their os's free to use none commercially,
>  with again, the money made via support contracts.

Unless there has been a big change, that is NOT true of Rdb.  At least 
at one time one could download a kit (not the latest) with no support if 
one were DEVELOPING a COMMERCIAL application.  While that is 
non-commercial (as long as it doesn't make money), it is a SMALL subset 
of non-commercial use and definitely NOT some sort of hobbyist or 
community license.

As for folks wondering why VSI could possibly care about VAX: If the 
message that gets through is that (some subset of) VMS users don't 
care about being legal, then VSI might think that continuing the 
Community License is a bad idea since some people might abuse it in 
order to avoid a commercial license.  Saying "MY type if illegal use is 
justified but some other type is not" doesn't cut it.  If people 
respected only the laws they agree with, then there would be no need for 
laws.  Another possibility is that it gives them a reason to stick to 
subscription licenses, since non-expiring licenses would allow people to 
continue without paying support.

People can debate about how likely various scenarios are.  Personally, 
I'm concerned that a few loud people give the (hopefully wrong) 
impression that most hobbyists don't care about sticking to the rules 
and that that could adversely affect the Community License and maybe 
even strengthen the case for subscription as opposed to non-expiring 
licenses.