Re: Mindmaster follow-up

< Next Message | Back to archived message list | Previous Message >

Note: This message is from the outliners.com archive kindly provided by Dave Winer.

Outliners.com Message ID: 3239

Posted by srdiamond15
2005-05-12 16:32:15

IMHO, MindMaster could weasel out from under your sally because you emphasized the wrong harm. The culpable harm is not to the authors of FreeMind, but to the purchasers of MindMaster. As to their duties to Freemind, they did conform to the terms of the open source contract. It’s of the essence of open source as I understand it to allow the use of others’ work for any sort of pecuniary gain, provided ONLY that the authors are given the contractually required recognition. (What I don’t understand about Open Source is the economic motivation, if any. I take it the economic motivation comes from the recognition. In substance, you get recognized, and it helps you get jobs. But I’ve never seen the motivation analyzed, and I might have it wrong.)

The difference between Redhead Linux in relation to UNIX and MasterMind in relation to FreeMind is that buyers of Redhead invariably know that the same code is available for free, and they opt for the technical support and other amenities they must pay for. Buyers of MindMaster (it seems evident to me) AS A RULE do NOT know that FreeMind, from which it is wholly derived, is a free product. The way MindMaster is written up on the web site, I would go so far as to say they *imply* MM is original with developer. If a closer analysis than I have made sustains that impression, MindMaster is colorably liable for fraud.

Stephen Diamond

Back to archived message list