I wasn't aware that Ubuntu One was integrated into Banshee. Thanks for informing me of that. I guess I just don't see the moral conundrum you're talking about.

I wasn't aware that Ubuntu One was integrated into Banshee. Thanks for informing me of that. I guess I just don't see the moral conundrum you're talking about. Isn't it better to ship with Amazon, replace the affiliate code, and promise at least some proceeds from the sale to GF rather than just leaving it out altogether? It seems to serve the needs of everyone that way -- Banshee still gets some cash, users get access to Amazon's store right off the bat, and Canonical isn't concerned about all their profit from affiliate sales disappearing. Why is this bad? I understand that some people preferred Banshee to Rhythmbox (I do too, for the record), but I also don't see how that changes things. Ubuntu is not taking from anyone, and any person is free to download a copy of Banshee with the affiliate code intact. This may be a good PR opportunity for someone who wants to support OSS -- maybe Google or Amazon could announce that they'll match the affiliate bonuses going to Canonical and send them to the EFF or GF or other foundation. Also, it may be nice if Ubuntu would offer a non-default package with the original code intact. However, I don't see a problem or anything wrong with what's happening here. I just don't see it. Ubuntu is increasing the exposure of Banshee and its potential affiliate revenues, persons are free to revert to the old affiliate code if they choose to do so, Canonical doesn't have to worry about the lost affiliate bonuses, and users are getting an all-around better music player in a way that works out for everyone. The Banshee developers chose to give their Amazon plugin away and should not have expected to make any substantial amount of money off of it under those circumstances. Anyone is and always has been free to change all of the code, including the affiliate, and the Banshee developers released the Amazon plugin with full knowledge that that was OK and allowed. Some even saw this coming, as the commenter on gburt.blogspot.com predicted such a controversy back in December. I'm just hard pressed to see any ethical conundrum here. Banshee is giving away the store plugin and its code; if Novell wanted to make money off of Banshee, they should have left the store under a restrictive license. Banshee's developers have always understood that anyone is free to replace the affiliate code. Canonical wants to distribute Banshee by default, but doesn't want to take a potentially serious loss of income in order to do so. Users want programs that come with full functionality, regardless of politics or developer infighting. The solution announced here seems like a great way to keep all of these people happy; Canonical will be forwarding a substantial portion of the substantially increased affiliate revenues to the beneficiary in the standalone Banshee distribution, they are playing well within the rules established by Banshee/Novell and the copyright licenses of the code, and users will have the options they want without having to jump through needless hoops. Where's the downside?