6 ms·
If he wanted to walk away there are plenty of other options there that aren't about money. Open source it, give it to the employees of Mojang, or another variet
by LandoCalrissian 12y ago
If he wanted to walk away there are plenty of other options there that aren't about money. Open source it, give it to the employees of Mojang, or another variety of options along the same lines.
This is completely about money, which is fine, but let's not pretend like their is some superior moral virtue going on here.
- gknoy 12y agoI think one can still take a lucrative action and still not have done it "for the money". Doing something "for money" means that the money was the goal, the driving force. Selling one's controlling stake in a profitable company, even if lucrative, could be for many other reasons: a desire to focus on something else, a desire to no longer have to check e-mails, and so on. Giving it away would be magnanimous, but isn't an ethical imperative (to most people). He wanted out for the reasons he stated (couldn't deal with the social pressures), and if that happens to come with a big fat paycheck, more power to him.
- bertil 12y agoHe wasn't involved in that project for years, and still was considered its moral guardian -- cf. the tweets about the EULA. Open-sourcing would most likely have not changed that. If you though copyright was complicated, try copyleft… I am not arguing one realm is superior to another; just that handling their interactions is something Notch has expressly said he didn't want to deal with. Selling is simple.