Re: Bug/problem with lcc-win
- From: jacob navia <jacob@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2008 01:46:51 +0200
Walter Roberson wrote:
In article <48485B32.2090504@xxxxxxxxxx>,
jacob navia <jacob@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
David Tiktin wrote:On 04 Jun 2008, Eddie <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Actually we decided to go with lcc-win because it's free,
If you're referring to lcc-win32, check again:
It's not free for commercial use.
You remember that song?
LET IT BE.
If I do not protest why should you?
Although it is not always -obvious- in clc, there are those here
who also earn their living (directly or indirectly) based upon software licensing fees.
That includes fees that might vary depending upon the commercial vs
non-commercial use. For example, the organization I work for sometimes
has reduced fees for academic use; such is not uncommon when one is
funded by research grants, and we often collaborate with universities,
gaining technology from them in return for sharing our efforts.
But since we do at least partly earn our living from license fees,
we are harmed if the general public starts assuming that free to
one target group means free to everyone, and thus goes ahead and
commercially uses software that is not free for commercial use.
This is correct and if I had a big organization I would
pursue Eddie. But I haven't. And it is a matter of being
practical. As Mr Twink said, if they are trying to buy
cheap licenses of 98 to spare money of buying an XP license,
I do not think they would hesitate a second to drop my
compiler if I would ask them even a token amount.
It is of course up to you as to how much (if anything) you ask Eddie to
pay for his commercial use of your product, but it is not good for
the industry if you say "If I do not protest why should you?": that
tends to encourage people to use software beyond the license terms
to the extent that they can "get away with it". And you have to be
careful: if you willingly "turn a blind eye" to a commercial company
using your licensed product without paying, then you could find that
you have lost your rights to enforce your contract terms, just the
same way that trademark holders can lose their rights to their
trademarks if they do not actively enforce ownership.
I would thus suggest that it would be better, both generally and
specifically, if you were to remind Eddie that the software is *not*
free for non-commercial use, and that his business needs to enter
into negotiation with you about its usage of your product. You might
choose to allow his business to not pay you any money for the use
of the product, but you should (IMHO) enter into a written agreement
with Eddie as to the limits of that no-cost use. For example, if
Eddie were to give -me- a copy of lcc-win, could I then use it for
commercial purposes? If he does not recognize the commercial usage
restrictions, then he could, after all, sub-license it to me; presumably
you do not wish to allow that kind of thing.
In principle you are right. Practically I can't pursue Eddie,
and even I helped him out in his efforts.
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
- Re: Bug/problem with lcc-win
- From: Eddie
- Re: Bug/problem with lcc-win
- Prev by Date: Re: how can i large divide?
- Next by Date: Re: is order urgent doubt
- Previous by thread: Re: Bug/problem with lcc-win
- Next by thread: Re: Bug/problem with lcc-win