Matt Pelletier, April 15:
> And if you could, how could the client then turn around and get a team
> to re-sell it under another name? That'd be breaking the license,
> right?
That's the point, that they're knowingly breaking the license. I might
not even be able to find out who did it, if this were an app with a big
install base. Breaking the license, on the part of the 'breaker', is not
a concern, esp. if there is not a great fear of legal prosecution. (this
relates to your comment below).
Well, look at instances where the GPL has been violated. I have no idea
how the people who have been violated have managed to figure it out, but
they have. Look at the MPlayer cases where code they've written has
wound up in DVD-players, or similar cases with routers using
netfilter/iptables code (see http://rubyurl.com/BTfkV\), and so on.
> Still, what you get with the "authentic" software is a sense of
> reliability, right?
It depends on the company using it. They might be just as willing to
hire a team of programmers to manage it themselves.
OK, but tell me this, how much does this matter? You are the ones who
have the actual original code and hopefully the best knowledge of it.
It wouldn't be hard to figure out when a customer suddenly stops using
your services, support, and so on and release their own software right?
You have to believe in some kind of justice system staying in effect
here, otherwise you might as well consider what happens when someone
breaks into your offices and steal your code that way, right?
> Cheap labor is everywhere but the US is it? Loose laws/enforcement
> everywhere but the US? Man, I don't want to be a bastard, but you're
> sounding just a tad racist right about now.
Race has nothing to do with it.
Precisely. You can still be what is called a racist without discussing
races. Culture, social situation, and religion are as much a part of
what defines an indiviual or a group.
I was not accusing you of being a racist, but it's been really tiresome
lately, where Americans have gotten it into their head that the US is
somehow the best place on Earth and that only they can save the rest of
the world. Don't get me wrong, I love America unhealthily much. I'm
just getting really tired of being adversely affected by stupid
decisions made 2000 miles (a horrible guess at the actual distance, I'm
sure) away.
This deals with the maturity of a country's Intellectual Property
laws, the labor cost of reverse engineering an application.
Remember Russia back in the 80s? They actually used hackers to hack
into American systems to gain access to C compilers and other tools.
People will gain access to your software by any means necessary if
necessary (hehe).
I'm seeking practical comments from people who understand that the
laws in various countries affect an unethical person's willingness to
try to make money from someone else's work illegitimately. If it is
inexpensive to hire programmers to reverse engineer an application,
and the Intellectual Property laws are not mature or well enforced,
than it is more attractive for someone with the resources to pursue
such an unethical track.
Well, if you figure that people will be able to reverse engineer
anything you write, what's the worry with using "dynamic languages"?
You won't get any of the money that someone will receive for
reverse-engineering your application anyway, so why give them that
satisfaction?
I used the US as an example because the ferocious enforcement of
Intellectual Property law would seem to be a discouraging, not
encouraging, factor. My simple point, perhaps not clearly explained,
is that fear of prosecution and the production costs play a role in
someone's decision when contemplating ripping something off (can i get
away with it?). It is all just hypothetical. Nothing deeper.
My bet is that almost all of the serious IP violations are taking place
in the US. The US IP and patent system is a cancer on the development
of new technology and other fields of knowledge. Both nationally and
internationally. Do you know how hard it is for foreigners to secure a
patent in the US? It's practically impossible. Its a corrupt, racist
system. We're talking Italian government corrupt and racist here.
You seem to be worrying too much about someone stealing your work and
profit than actually figuring out how to make your work generate profit
in the first place. I understand that you are worried that you will
lose out, but in the end nothing is more important than providing a
service that people want. If you do, no one will ever be able to
replace you, unless they do something that's better and they
theoretically can't do that by simply copying what you do. Now they may
get a jump-start by reverse-engineering your work and/or simply copying
your sources, but as far as I understand it takes as much work (if not
more) trying to understand someone elses system as writing your own.
> >If you are operating as an ASP (a la 37 signals with Basecamp),
> >this isn't much of an issue. However, if you have to give your
> >software to *anyone*, whether a client to run on their own network,
> >or to a 3rd party in general, what are your options?
> Why do you have to give it away?
I don't. I meant 'give' as in deliver or install, as part of the
license agreement (if it's not run from my server).
Yes, but why would you have to do that? What's so great about providing
an online service is that you control everything. You can provide
updates immediately, you don't have to give anyone access to anything
you don't want them to have access to, and so on.
> >This isn't really a concern when dealing with smaller projects for
> >smaller clients, where the compensation is based on project time,
> >even if license it to them (as opposed to letting them own it). In
> >those cases, PHP (and from this point forward RoR!) is usually the
> >best choice, for all the reasons that we love (quick development,
> >simple changes / customization). But when you're licensing software
> >that you own, the value - which at face value is the feature set
> >and maintenance/support services - ultimately boils down to the
> >source code, and needs to be protected to the fullest possible
> >extent. Yes there are business models where the value is strictly
> >your support (Red Hat, at least at first), but that's not really
> >what I'm asking about (though I welcome the comments).
> You obviously haven't had much experience with open source. It
> seems that you should get more information before posting questions
> regarding open source to a programming-language mailing list.
> Opensource.org should have all the information you may need. I am
> not trying to end this discussion, but I don't think you'll get much
> out of this discussion if you haven't tried to understand how open
> source works.
Thanks for the thoughtful advice.
Sorry if I sounded a bit harsh. I just get a bit excited in these kinds
of discussions. I really need to take a course in rhetoric...
> >This is something I've been curious about for some time, but PHP et
> >al have never been attractive alternatives for larger projects. RoR
> >is compelling enough that these concerns have escalated.
> Again, when you're developing an online service, you really don't
> have to worry about anyone trying to steal your work. You control
> everything. Check out some of the essays by Paul Graham
> (paulgraham.com) on the subject,
That's the point I was making re. 'operating as an ASP' above.
Look, overall, this is a hypothetical and marginal situation (where
bad people do bad things), and I'm just trying to cull the experience
of helpful programmers. I realize this may not be a likely situation,
but it does happen, that I'm just trying to see what people know about
these things. Nothing more. I hope I haven't offended people by
referring to countries, laws, labor costs, and the decision making
processes of unethical people.
As I see it, and I guess it makes me sort of a pessimist, people are
going to do bad things. For that reason, you simply can't worry too
much about what they're going to do and instead focus on being good
yourself and doing good onto others.
I'll try and leave this alone now, allowing more experienced people tell
you about these sorts of issues.
My main suggestion is: If you can put your services on the Web, then
do so. You will open up your business for an incredibly large number of
potential customer and you will still make sure that you are in control
over everything. Also, consider providing your service for a price that
may seem far too low initially. Look at flickr. People can create an
account for free. This is probably costing flickr a bunch of revenue
and money (for maintenance, servers, and so on). But if they hadn't
done so, who would have bought into it? I would never (and perhaps
never will as I don't take that many pictures anyway) pay the $59.95
that a pro account costs without seeing it work first. And, as far as I
can tell, flickr's main attraction is that anyone can gain access to it
for free. Still, in the long run, people are going to want the features
that a pro account will provide them with and will pay the $59.95
annually. Consider how much revenue this will generate at that time.
Consider how flickr was bought by yahoo for $18 million. Flickr would
never have been such a success if people didn't have such easy access to
it.
Blah blah blah, but there's a point to be made in there somewhere.
Anyway, good luck with your endeavors,
nikolai
···
--
Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/\!
Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden.
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}
