If you wish support from them, (additional to 10,000 copies) that would be commercial and cost money. Similar if you ask them to implement a solution for you(integrate the system), that would also be actual human work and cost money.
If a company would ask such volume, they would purchase integration and support sevice and just dd one copy around the machines.
I think I have put it nicely seperated and clear, yet you have fun mixing different parts and asking me to separate your salad ;)
And BTW, you can sell "free software", even in the eyes of the FSF. Thus where the whole "free as in speech, not as in beer" phrase came about. Now if it is viable or not, that is an entirely different matter, however "free software" does not mean "free as in no money".
Sorry, but this doesn't make sense:Quote:
You said that RedHat and Novell are selling code - I responded that they are not and showed two things you need to do in order to get and use their code for no charge
1. I say that RedHat and Novell are selling code
2. You argue that they are not
3. You then say that you need to do extra things in order to get their code for no charge
How does this work? According to #3, you need to pay in order to use their code, which implies #1: that they sell code (among other things, such as support). Yet with #2 you say that they don't.
I have always considered Red Hat as selling a package (source code, support and/or training). Ditto for Canonical. Yes, you can also get the source code for free, it's there - but as a company that may not make sense from an economic standpoint.
Btw I have a theory that in fact the only 'true' opensource is code you've sold to mircosoft for less than its value so they can make everyone buy it when purchasing a pc. The source code of course available to all, encripted and sealed in a microsoft vault never to be seen or fixed properly ever again. Do you care to bother disagreeing with me in the morning?