What is OSRM's business model?

Authored by: PJ on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 05:47 PM EST

Well, one advantage of resigning is I am completely free to speak. So here is your answer: legal matters can't be handled in the open source manner. They just can't. Not if you wish to win. The community seriously needs to learn to trust and support with greater loyalty those putting themselves on the line. Or reserve judgment if you wish. But to assume the worst renders you less powerful than you could be.

Think about SCO v. IBM. SCO blabbed and blabbed all over the place. IBM said nothing. Which one showed wisdom? DId IBM's silence mean they don't get open source? Don't have the right attitude toward the GPL? No. It meant they are smart about legal things. Legal matters are different than writing software. You guys must learn that, or you will ruin everything. Yes. You.

So she doesn't see her behavior as hypocritical, because it doesn't have anything to do with software.

I'm a little bit confused about her example, though.  IBM may have said little, but PJ said a lot, and it had a large PUBLIC effect (but probably a negligible legal one).  SCO said a lot and it pumped up their stock price.  The legal ramifications may have been negative, but that might have been irrelevant in their motivations.
IBM could have said much of what PJ said, and I don't think it would have made a difference, legally.  The problem with SCO's comments is that they were FALSE, not that they were public.