[Lazarus] Lazarus platform "popularity contest"

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Ger Remmers wrote:

>> What is more I think that he has that "right to know" irrespective of
>> your views or consent. Whether I like that or not is irrelevant.
> 
> And here we disagree. No developer has "the right" to know what I use the 
> program for as long as I don't claim the program to be my product.

At first sight that appears to be a valid position. However considering 
the case below Westinghouse weren't claiming that they owned BusyBox, 
merely distributing it with complete disregard for the license. Hence 
the owner /does/ have a right to know it's being used, even if the user 
is entirely silent about what they're doing with the software.

The fact that in some cases the owner goes on record as saying that he's 
not currently interested doesn't mean that he doesn't have the right to 
know.

>> I'm sure that you're aware that there is a small but growing number of
>> companies who have been forced to admit that they were abusing the
>> (L)GPL: do you think that they consented to the software's owners
>> finding out that they were doing that?
> 
> I wasn't aware of that ( I don't keep tabs on the software world).

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/04/gpl_violation_westinghouse/

With respect, if you aren't aware of what's going on you might refrain 
from commenting on who's got rights to do what. Anyway, this probably 
isn't a good place to continue this subthread.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]