[Asterisk-Users] RE: Business Edition

[Brian West]

Or better yet.. modify the disclaimer like I and a few others did to  
say that the only thing you will disclaim are things you post on the  
bug tracker!  NO UPDATES, NO CHANGES, NO NOTHING!  If its not posted  
under your user on mantis IT IS NOT DISCLAIMED!

/b

On Jul 23, 2005, at 2:59 PM, William Lloyd wrote:

>
> On 23-Jul-05, at 11:22 AM, Kevin Walsh wrote:
>
>
>>> On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 18:18 +0100, Kevin Walsh wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Adam Goryachev [mailinglists at websitemanagers.com.au] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 04:15 +0100, Kevin Walsh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> For this reason, I believe that if a fork were
>>>>>> ever necessary, it would struggle to beat a distinct path away  
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> the Asterisk Binary Edition
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Correct, until the point where there is MORE features being  
>>>>> added to
>>>>> the forked version of asterisk than the digium version of  
>>>>> asterisk.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> That can't happen, because the ABE could, and probably would,  
>>>> absorb
>>>> all of the advances in the fork, while forging ahead with the
>>>> original.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Since the fork would be GPL only, if ABE 'absorbed' the new  
>>> features,
>>> then it would 'become' GPL, and therefore would need to be  
>>> released as
>>> GPL, and hence would no longer by ABE :) So, that can't happen.  
>>> Any other
>>> ideas?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> You're forgetting about the "disclaimer" documents.  Anyone who  
>> signed
>> the perpetual agreement and made changes and/or enhancements to the
>> Asterisk code (a fork would still be using Asterisk code) would  
>> firstly
>> be obliged to inform "the owner", and would secondly have a prior
>> agreement with "the owner" to allow them to use and close the code.
>> That would neatly bypass the GPL and allow the new code to be folded
>> into the Asterisk Binary Edition.
>>
>
> It's unlikely that the current pool of asterisk developers will  
> remain static however.  People change jobs, new people find  
> asterisk interesting, people that have not contributed before start  
> to contribute.
>
> Assuming a fork were to happen one day.  Lots of current developers  
> would stay with the Digium tree because they know it, are digium  
> partners, think it's a better idea, already signed the disclaimer  
> and don;t have an issue with it etc.  Many new developers  
> submitting smaller patches would not bother to sign a legal  
> disclaimer and just submit the patch to the full GPL tree.  The  
> splinter GPL tree would likely integrate the changes faster and  
> obviously don;t care about a disclaimer.
>
> The practicalities of tracking the changes between two source trees  
> would just get more and more time consuming for Digium.  They will  
> want to make 100% legal sure that every change they bring into  
> their tree comes from somebody with a disclaimer.
>
> Rewriting the missing bits with other programmers would just help  
> the tree's diverge faster.
>
> Meanwhile a full GPL tree can just plow ahead without concern.
>
> Many companies successfully manage the commercial GPL gap.  MySQL  
> for example.  The difference in this case is selling a binary only  
> version instead of making money off just hardware and support  
> services/contracts.
>
> At the end of the day Digium own the Asterisk trademark and in the  
> world these days, brand name recognition is often more important  
> than the product behind it.
>
> -bill
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Users mailing list
> Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>