On 12/31/2012 02:40 PM, Immanuel Giulea wrote:
Hello all,
In the marketing materials that I am writing covering LO vs AOO, I
was
wondering if it would be relevant to go into an explanation about why
the
GPL/LGPL licence used by LO was superior to the ASL as a "true open
source".
I found this great document that explains the three "most common"
licences:
ASL, GPL and LGPL (MPL is not included) (1, 2)
Any thoughts on how relevant it would be to extract some of the
information
and apply it on the materials?
Cheers and Happy New Year
Immanuel
(1)
http://www.openlogic.com/Portals/172122/docs/understanding-the-three-most-common-open-source-licenses.pdf
(2) http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/10518967
Reviewing the Openlogic information I think we should compare the
GPL/LGPL with the typical proprietary license not the ASL. The
differences between the ASL and GPL/LGPL while important are, IMHO,
more
a matter of degree than kind. Both are intended to be user friendly and
allow user modifications and access to the source code that the typical
proprietary license does not allow.
Comparing GPL/LGPL to a proprietary license
1. GPL gives users complete access to the source code. This allows
users
to compile the code for another platform, modify the code, or extend
the
code as they see fit. Proprietary code does not allow any access to the
source code.
2. GPL license implies the unrestricted installation of the program
without cost to the user. Proprietary licenses have varying
restrictions
on the number of allowed installations.
3. FOSS projects have free, unlimited user support from dedicated users
with some form of question and answer interaction between the user and
responder(s). Some projects also have commercial support available.
Proprietary software often does not have free user forums or user lists
where anyone can ask a question and get answers. Typically, proprietary
software offers knowledge base articles and paid support.
4. Most GPL licensed projects promote contributions from all interested
individuals. This community, often worldwide, brings a broader
perspective to the project even if the actual code development is done
by relatively few individuals. Proprietary projects can have problems
with gaining a sufficiently broad perspective because the developers
are
more isolated from the end users during development.
--
Jay Lozier
jslozier@gmail.com
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
marketing+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.