"Commercial Software" - Revision history

Delawen: /* Proprietary Licensed Software */

2019-08-25T07:25:56Z

Proprietary Licensed Software

Arnulf at 11:01, 13 December 2013

2013-12-13T11:01:37Z

Neteler: url update

2013-10-17T18:57:05Z

url update

Neteler: +"Don't oppose Free Software and Commercial Software" by Jan Wagner

2009-09-04T18:02:32Z

+"Don't oppose Free Software and Commercial Software" by Jan Wagner

Arnulf: /* Reducing Confusion */

2008-01-24T18:59:47Z

Reducing Confusion

Arnulf: "BSD-style" is not clearly defined, changed to FreeBSD license

2007-09-27T14:25:07Z

"BSD-style" is not clearly defined, changed to FreeBSD license

Arnulf: added Category:Advocacy

2007-07-29T15:27:55Z

added Category:Advocacy

Arnulf: Commercial Software moved to "Commercial Software": Quotes added to make sure that the term is not well defined

2007-07-29T09:19:55Z

Commercial Software moved to "Commercial Software": Quotes added to make sure that the term is not well defined

Arnulf: some comments on the use of the term "commercial software"

2007-07-29T09:18:52Z

some comments on the use of the term "commercial software"

New page

''Software can be used in commercial contexts to make [[Business]]. This is true for most [[Free Software]] and [[Open Source]] licenses, regardless of whether they implement [[Copyleft]] (like the GNU GPL) or whether they are more permissive (like MIT or BSD style licenses).''

== Free and Open Source Software ==
[[Free Software]] and [[Open Source]] describe a licensing model that promotes the commercial use of the software by preventing individuals to restrict distribution to their own terms. "Their own terms" refers to the notion of property, hence the terminology "proprietary" - to be in someone's property.

== Proprietary Licensed Software ==
Proprietary licenses can make it a lot more difficult to use the corresponding software commercially due to complicated and complex usage restrictions. In many cases license definitions have to be modified to be applicable to national law. Proprietary licenses tend to be modified more frequently due to changes in the market, competitor's strategies, the law, and so on. This potential for change makes it much more difficult for a professional and commercial users to calculate TCO, protect their investment and implement scalability.

== Commercial Software ==
For all of the above reasons it does not make much sense to use the term "commercial software" as opposed to Open Source or Free Software. If the two opposing license models are to be differentiated, then the correct term is "proprietary software".

== Reducing Confusion ==
Unfortunately the term "proprietary" is also used in the context of interoperability and describes software that does not follow open standards. From this perspective the term "proprietary" can sometimes be applied to Free and Open Source Software interfaces. Any software that does not follow standard interfaces or file formats has "their own" (proprietary) interface definitions. In this case the "owner" is the "software" and the object of ownership is the interface or data format. Do not confuse this with licenses where the "owner" is an individual or an organization and the object of ownership is the software.

The "owner" of a "software" automatically "inherits" what is "owned" by the software. Thus the proprietary restrictions on the software also apply to the interfaces. One good example where this problem has been recognized and is now being changed is the Google-owned format KML. Google is currently transferring the ownership (copyright) of [[KML]] to the [[OGC]] so that the interface can become an open standard.

''If you have a more adept, clean, expert, skilled and smart way of expressing these issues without using so many "quotes" please feel free to help [[User:Seven me]] clean this terminological mess up. ''

== More Links and Definitions ==
* There was some discussion on the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_software Wikipedia page on Commercial Software] which eventually ended up as a redirect to "Business Software" (linked by --[[User:Arnulf Christl|Seven]] 11:18, 29 July 2007 (CEST)).
* ''Feel free to add more links that make sense in this context''

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:01, 13 December 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	''Software can be used in commercial contexts to make [[Business]]. ~~This~~ is ~~true for most [[~~Free Software~~]] and [[Open Source]] licenses, regardless of whether they implement [[Copyleft]] (like the GNU GPL) or whether they are more permissive (like the MIT or FreeBSD licenses)~~.''	+	''Software can be used in commercial contexts to make [[Business]]. Therefore the term "commercial software" is a misnomer. The opposite of Open Source and Free Software is "proprietary software". ''

	== Free and Open Source Software ==		== Free and Open Source Software ==

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 == More Links and Definitions ==
 * There was some discussion on the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_software Wikipedia page on Commercial Software] which eventually ended up as a redirect to "Business Software" (linked by --[[User:Arnulf Christl|Seven]] 11:18, 29 July 2007 (CEST)).
-* [http://www.intevation.de/~jan/infos/dont_oppose_commercial_and_free_software.en.html Don't oppose Free Software and Commercial Software] by Jan Wagner (2004)
+* [http://web.archive.org/web/20050227215749/http://intevation.net/~jan/infos/dont_oppose_commercial_and_free_software.en.html Don't oppose Free Software and Commercial Software] by Jan Wagner (2004)
 * ''Feel free to add more links that make sense in this context''
 [[Category:Advocacy]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:25, 27 September 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	''Software can be used in commercial contexts to make [[Business]]. This is true for most [[Free Software]] and [[Open Source]] licenses, regardless of whether they implement [[Copyleft]] (like the GNU GPL) or whether they are more permissive (like MIT or ~~BSD style~~ licenses).''	+	''Software can be used in commercial contexts to make [[Business]]. This is true for most [[Free Software]] and [[Open Source]] licenses, regardless of whether they implement [[Copyleft]] (like the GNU GPL) or whether they are more permissive (like the MIT or FreeBSD licenses).''

	== Free and Open Source Software ==		== Free and Open Source Software ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:27, 29 July 2007
Line 20:		Line 20:
	* There was some discussion on the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_software Wikipedia page on Commercial Software] which eventually ended up as a redirect to "Business Software" (linked by --[[User:Arnulf Christl\|Seven]] 11:18, 29 July 2007 (CEST)).		* There was some discussion on the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_software Wikipedia page on Commercial Software] which eventually ended up as a redirect to "Business Software" (linked by --[[User:Arnulf Christl\|Seven]] 11:18, 29 July 2007 (CEST)).
	* ''Feel free to add more links that make sense in this context''		* ''Feel free to add more links that make sense in this context''
		+
		+	[[Category:Advocacy]]

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 == Proprietary Licensed Software ==
-Proprietary licenses can make it a lot more difficult to use the corresponding software commercially due to complicated and complex usage restrictions. In many cases license definitions have to be modified to be applicable to national law. Proprietary licenses tend to be modified more frequently due to changes in the market, competitor's strategies, the law, and so on. This potential for change makes it much more difficult for a professional and commercial users to calculate TCO, protect their investment and implement scalability.
+Proprietary licenses (also called Restricting licenses) can make it a lot more difficult to use the corresponding software commercially due to complicated and complex usage restrictions. In many cases license definitions have to be modified to be applicable to national law. Proprietary licenses tend to be modified more frequently due to changes in the market, competitor's strategies, the law, and so on. This potential for change makes it much more difficult for a professional and commercial users to calculate TCO, protect their investment and implement scalability.
 == Commercial Software ==

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 Unfortunately the term "proprietary" is also used in the context of interoperability and describes software that does not follow open standards. From this perspective the term "proprietary" can sometimes be applied to Free and Open Source Software interfaces. Any software that does not follow standard interfaces or file formats has "their own" (proprietary) interface definitions. In this case the "owner" is the "software" and the object of ownership is the interface or data format. Do not confuse this with licenses where the "owner" is an individual or an organization and the object of ownership is the software.
-The "owner" of a "software" automatically "inherits" what is "owned" by the software. Thus the proprietary restrictions on the software also apply to the interfaces. One good example where this problem has been recognized and is now being changed is the Google-owned format KML. Google is currently transferring the ownership (copyright) of [[KML]] to the [[OGC]] so that the interface can become an open standard.
+The "owner" of a "software" automatically "inherits" what is "owned" by the software. Thus the proprietary restrictions on the software also apply to the interfaces. One good example where this problem has been recognized and is now being changed is the Google-owned format KML. Google has transferred the ownership (copyright) of [[KML]] to the [[OGC]] so that the interface can become an open standard.
-''If you have a more adept, clean, expert, skilled and smart way of expressing these issues without using so many "quotes" please feel free to help [[User:Seven me]] clean this terminological mess up. ''
+''If you have a more adept, clean, expert, skilled and smart way of expressing these issues without using so many "quotes" please feel free to help [[User:Seven]] clean this terminological mess up. ''
 == More Links and Definitions ==

← Older revision	Revision as of 09:19, 29 July 2007
(No difference)