A recent Slashdot article on the Verizon GPL infringement suit got me to thinking - the reciprocal nature of the GPL may be partly to blame for the whole SAAS movement, which itself encourages the continued concentration of power into the hands of a few.
You can deploy all the GPL'd software you want to a server - in that case you're not distributing binaries, you're just using them to deliver something else. But for companies that want to sell software, GPL is a poison pill. They can't sell software that anyone can just take for free. Preventing people from selling software will tend to concentrate power into the hands of the few organizations that can use economies of scale to barter their services for end-users' attention.
That's right - I'm saying that commercial software is actually the answer to unchecked consolidation of power in the software business. It's time people got used to paying for software again, with cash, rather than paying for it below the table (where consumers tend to get screwed).
You can deploy all the GPL'd software you want to a server - in that case you're not distributing binaries, you're just using them to deliver something else. But for companies that want to sell software, GPL is a poison pill. They can't sell software that anyone can just take for free. Preventing people from selling software will tend to concentrate power into the hands of the few organizations that can use economies of scale to barter their services for end-users' attention.
That's right - I'm saying that commercial software is actually the answer to unchecked consolidation of power in the software business. It's time people got used to paying for software again, with cash, rather than paying for it below the table (where consumers tend to get screwed).