Re: Academic and open source rate

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:48 AM, SM <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hola Arturo,
>
> At 07:34 19-08-2013, Arturo Servin wrote:
>
>>         Academic might work. "Open source" not so much as other
>> mentioned. Does
>> "Big Corporation" doing Open Source apply?
>>
>>         I was tempted to propose "non-profit", but also there are
>> organizations
>> with large budgets. And profit driven ones with not much money.
>>
>
> "Open source" is difficult.  As people pointed out "open source" does not
> necessarily mean free.  "open source" does not necessarily mean
> "non-profit".  I used the term loosely.  If hypothetically speaking, there
> was formal action, a clearer term might be needed.
>
> Irrespective of my views, "big corporation" is what helps the IETF
> operate.  If "big corporation" doing open source applies it will become a
> problem for the IETF.  The main issue is why should the IETF subsidize a
> particular group.  It can also be argued that it is not fair to subsidize a
> particular group.
>

If getting open source implementations is a desirable goal then the way to
address that goal is for ISOC or other parties with funds to provide
bursaries to the developers. Isn't that the reason they got the $$$ .org
money?


-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/