[Asterisk-Users] Re: www.openpbx.org

[Mike M]

On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 09:20:07AM -0400, Paul wrote:
> 
> I find that amusing. I have a lot of experience with disassembly. I have 
> even reverse-engineered machine language code that ran on custom 
> processors which means you have to reverse-engineer the instruction set 
> as part of the task.
> 
I think your argument is: Don't require or offer closed source
applications since they can be cracked.

Similarly we shouldn't lock our doors when we leave home because they
can be overridden.

Locks, like closed source, are legal barriers that work most of the
time for their intended purpose.

The discussion of licensing issues on forking Asterisk should assume
everyone understands and follows the applicable legal guidelines on 
software licensing.

The earlier point was Asterisk with its commercial license option, and 
presumably closed source traits, will be required some situations. 
Having closed source as component of a certified solution is topical 
ointment enjoyed by purveyors of certificates.  If this is true then 
OpenPBX, lacking a similar license option could be at a competitive 
disadvantage.

But what if OpenPBX attains features that are desireable but uncertifiable
because the closed source option does not exist?  Then we'll be living in
interesting times ( http://www.noblenet.org/reference/inter.htm ).

> Closed source might delay the cracker but it also delays pre-crack and 
> post-crack countermeasures.

What's the alternative?  Open source?  Cracking is unnecessary with open
source.

-- 
Mike