On 12/31/2012 02:40 PM, Immanuel Giulea wrote:
In the marketing materials that I am writing covering LO vs AOO, I was
wondering if it would be relevant to go into an explanation about why the
GPL/LGPL licence used by LO was superior to the ASL as a "true open
An average user does not care and will likely only be confused by any
claim that LO is better than AOO based on LO using a more restrictive
license or some sort of moral high ground that people should only use
software using this license. I expect that the more a person cares
about the distinction, the more likely they will not need marketing
material to explain it to them.
I found this great document that explains the three "most common"
ASL, GPL and LGPL (MPL is not included) (1, 2)
Any thoughts on how relevant it would be to extract some of the
and apply it on the materials?
Almost none. If you do desire to add something, I would probably say
something like this (but with cleaned up wording and more thought).
"Project contributors will note <blah blah blah>". Or have a section
that calls out advantages specifically for people that changes stuff and
contribute it back. The license is a choice, and some will prefer it and
some will not.
Cheers and Happy New Year
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy