-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Alex Hudson wrote:
Is the proposal here that GBN applies to businesses themselves, or to the products that GBN businesses sell? As a consumer, I think the latter is vastly more interesting to me, but the discussion seems to be more about the former.
The existing proposals for the GBN definition determine what types of products and services an eligible business can offer, thereby leading the discussion to consideration of the business structure behind the products and services. A key issue might be that the GBN potentially precludes certain types of corporate activity. For instance, the existing GBN definition does not allow support provision for both free and non-free applications. This restriction has an ethical foundation, leading us back towards discussions of what constitutes a Free Software Business.
I believe it's true that consumers will be interested in the products and services offered. However, if the GBN were only to apply to the actual products and services (with no provision for business structure) it would become a product label applied when convenient. This may occur in the same way that the OSI trademark can be applied if a product uses one of their approved licenses. It is therefore possible that Bob's Non-Free Software Services could offer one application that would get a GBN stamp, while continuing to offer and support a full range of non-free products.
The really tricky bit comes when we discuss how to provide a fair avenue of entry to the GBN for companies that currently offer non-free services. In short, how is it possible to offer a method of conversion to Free Software without opening the GBN to abuse and misapplication?
Shane
PS: Hey Alex, I'll be in London in August for a talk at GLLUG. Want to meet for a coffee?
- -- Shane Martin Coughlan e: shane@opendawn.com m: +447773180107 (UK) +353862262570 (Ire) w: www.opendawn.com - --- OpenPGP: http://www.opendawn.com/shane/publickey.asc