2 ms·

Reasonable, maybe, but in conflict with https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllow

Reasonable, maybe, but in conflict with https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMon...: “Does the GPL allow me to sell copies of the program for money? Yes, the GPL allows everyone to do this. The right to sell copies is part of the definition of free software. Except in one special situation, there is no limit on what price you can charge. (The one exception is the required written offer to provide source code that must accompany binary-only release.)” On the other hand, there’s https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLRequireAvailabilityToPublic https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLRequireA...: “if someone pays your fee and gets a copy, the GPL gives them the freedom to release it to the public, with or without a fee. For example, someone could pay your fee, and then put her copy on a web site for the general public.” App Store rules may make that difficult to do for the buyer.

init2null 4y ago
That's outdated terminology from a time where physical media was needed. Or perhaps we could say that it's in a store's best interest to go beyond that into curation. Just like physical stores do. Consumer protection demands that we don't get OpenerOffice, EasyWords, LetterWriter, etc. as paid forks with no differentiation, generated in bulk by spammers in poorer countries. Meaningful code improvements should be required.
ViViDboarder 4y ago
It’s not in conflict at all. The person may have the right to sell it, but not the right for Microsoft to list it.
kyriakos 4y ago
Similarly apple gate keeps its own appstore to a much greater extend considering that there is no alternative or way to side load apps. I would agree with the article if the policy was enforced universally in Windows but this is just about selling via its store.

init2null 4y ago

That's outdated terminology from a time where physical media was needed. Or perhaps we could say that it's in a store's best interest to go beyond that into curation. Just like physical stores do. Consumer protection demands that we don't get OpenerOffice, EasyWords, LetterWriter, etc. as paid forks with no differentiation, generated in bulk by spammers in poorer countries. Meaningful code improvements should be required.

ViViDboarder 4y ago

It’s not in conflict at all. The person may have the right to sell it, but not the right for Microsoft to list it.

kyriakos 4y ago

Similarly apple gate keeps its own appstore to a much greater extend considering that there is no alternative or way to side load apps. I would agree with the article if the policy was enforced universally in Windows but this is just about selling via its store.