Re: [ox-en] mozilla use of money
- From: "Per I. Mathisen" <per fix.no>
- Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 13:02:21 +0000 (GMT)
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Markus wrote:
i see. well, the comparisonis - imo - not very suitable because mozilla
makes its money from the time and interest investment of the open source
community. imo, this gives the community some right to have a say how
the money that they generate is being spend.
Well, I think this is true in a very general way, in that contribution
gives a moral entitlement to have a say in how the results are
distributed. However, how this moral insight is resolved in terms of hard
rules, legal statutes and law is entirely a practical and pragmatic
matter.
please correct me if i am wrong, but to me it seems that there are a lot
of people who do something for mozilla;
yet, all the money that is generated goes into the foundation and nothing
(or very very little) goes back to the community.
The "community" does not want money from the mozilla foundation, it wants
improved, free software, such as a better firefox browser. That is why the
foundation exists, that is why people contribute.
but regarding the long term steering of a community and the goal of
promoting open source vs proprietary software (i think this is something
most people inhere would agree with), i dont think inclusion of multiple
interests is a bad thing.
I am not sure that the "community" (whatever this means) is in need of
"steering" (whatever that means), and I am sure that when there is a
product worth promoting, someone will fill the need and do just that. One
thing we see quite often around successful free software projects, eg
apache, is the quick rise of consulting companies that promote the product
along with their consulting services for it.
why do you trust the mozilla foundation? it has been set up by aol. on
basis of which actions do you trust them?
They deliver a good product under a good, free license.
what is the essence of democracy? to me, its about diverese interests
participate in one way or another in the steering of the
community/instution.
That is not democracy. You can have participatory dictatorships and other
decision making processes that listen carefully to everyone before making
decisions. Typically maintainers of a free software project do listen
carefully to other participants. That is not the issue. Democracy is about
giving everyone an equal right to vote for decisions. That is not always
the best way to organize.
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Markus wrote:
agree for the typical open source application. but i dont agree with an
application that could be of such great help(because it generates lots of
money) in making open source a success in the marketplace.
Well, there is the problem. You think the purpose of open source
applications should be to generate money and be a success in the
marketplace. I think free software points beyond the marketplace in that
it is a more efficient method of production -because- it does not have the
overhead of careful accounting and anxious property protection. This is
also how I have understood the Oekonux project.
If free software projects were to follow your advice, that would destroy
the very thing that makes them so uniquely more efficient as a method of
production.
- Per
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de