<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Toward a free web</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2008/09/14/toward-a-free-web/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2008/09/14/toward-a-free-web/</link>
	<description>a potpourri of mirth and madness</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 03:06:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: yungchin</title>
		<link>http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2008/09/14/toward-a-free-web/#comment-114</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[yungchin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:28:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mdzlog.wordpress.com/?p=36#comment-114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s actually the other way around. As you point out, running web services costs money and for many such services it&#039;s not attractive to decentralise them - now that is *exactly* why there&#039;s no reason to worry about giving away the code that runs these services.

Take your example of Facebook: nobody would attempt setting up the same shop at another domain, because they wouldn&#039;t stand a chance - after all, if Facebook uses something like an Affero license, whatever fancy extensions you come up with they can then take back, too. I even don&#039;t think someone would manage to set up an ad-free version - how would that pay for itself? 

Users might however &quot;scratch their itches&quot; and fix whatever bug is in their way, or they might try to get extensions accepted into the project. In addition, users would have the comforting feeling that they *could* in theory set up a community server - think of it as a backup for the hypothetical situation that Facebook would go bust. It&#039;s a win-win situation.
 
An interesting thing is that you do of course need to be big enough for this principle to kick in. Facebook has reached a user base that would allow them to do this without fear of, say, AOL taking their code and setting up a more popular equivalent. That&#039;s why I think it&#039;s smart to keep Launchpad (sorry to bring that up, but actually Dread Knight did :)) under covers for a couple more months.

Maybe a nice &quot;standard practice&quot; on the web would be to release new web services with a EULA that promises the user to hand over the code to them at a set date in the future. If by that date you didn&#039;t get big enough to be protected by above principle - well, then you didn&#039;t have a good service anyway....]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s actually the other way around. As you point out, running web services costs money and for many such services it&#8217;s not attractive to decentralise them &#8211; now that is *exactly* why there&#8217;s no reason to worry about giving away the code that runs these services.</p>
<p>Take your example of Facebook: nobody would attempt setting up the same shop at another domain, because they wouldn&#8217;t stand a chance &#8211; after all, if Facebook uses something like an Affero license, whatever fancy extensions you come up with they can then take back, too. I even don&#8217;t think someone would manage to set up an ad-free version &#8211; how would that pay for itself? </p>
<p>Users might however &#8220;scratch their itches&#8221; and fix whatever bug is in their way, or they might try to get extensions accepted into the project. In addition, users would have the comforting feeling that they *could* in theory set up a community server &#8211; think of it as a backup for the hypothetical situation that Facebook would go bust. It&#8217;s a win-win situation.</p>
<p>An interesting thing is that you do of course need to be big enough for this principle to kick in. Facebook has reached a user base that would allow them to do this without fear of, say, AOL taking their code and setting up a more popular equivalent. That&#8217;s why I think it&#8217;s smart to keep Launchpad (sorry to bring that up, but actually Dread Knight did :)) under covers for a couple more months.</p>
<p>Maybe a nice &#8220;standard practice&#8221; on the web would be to release new web services with a EULA that promises the user to hand over the code to them at a set date in the future. If by that date you didn&#8217;t get big enough to be protected by above principle &#8211; well, then you didn&#8217;t have a good service anyway&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peng&#8217;s links for Tuesday, 16 September &#171; I&#8217;m Just an Avatar</title>
		<link>http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2008/09/14/toward-a-free-web/#comment-113</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Peng&#8217;s links for Tuesday, 16 September &#171; I&#8217;m Just an Avatar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 20:11:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mdzlog.wordpress.com/?p=36#comment-113</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Zimmermn: Toward a free web. With the move toward web-based applications, although that&#8217;s not an entirely new thing, [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Zimmermn: Toward a free web. With the move toward web-based applications, although that&#8217;s not an entirely new thing, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fjpoblam</title>
		<link>http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2008/09/14/toward-a-free-web/#comment-108</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[fjpoblam]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 01:16:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mdzlog.wordpress.com/?p=36#comment-108</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A major obstacle to free trade is free pathways. You may be aware of the flap over Google&#039;s original TOS for Chrome. The TOS demanded one &quot;give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive licence to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through&quot; the browser.

This is &quot;standard&quot; wording for many online services. After many gripes, Google changed the words for Chrome, but the words persist for Google Docs, Bookmarks, Apps, and various other Google Services. We may &quot;trust&quot; Google to &quot;do no evil&quot; but the &quot;opportunity&quot; (at least legally) persists.

Similar TOS wording is enforced for e.g., Wordpress. Creators of online materials should not have to accrue the right to &quot;adapt and modify&quot; their works, forever and ever, world without end, in order to use online services. (I am certain Google will not allow us to &quot;adapt and modify&quot; the Google corporate logo!) This will continue to get in our way.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A major obstacle to free trade is free pathways. You may be aware of the flap over Google&#8217;s original TOS for Chrome. The TOS demanded one &#8220;give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive licence to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through&#8221; the browser.</p>
<p>This is &#8220;standard&#8221; wording for many online services. After many gripes, Google changed the words for Chrome, but the words persist for Google Docs, Bookmarks, Apps, and various other Google Services. We may &#8220;trust&#8221; Google to &#8220;do no evil&#8221; but the &#8220;opportunity&#8221; (at least legally) persists.</p>
<p>Similar TOS wording is enforced for e.g., WordPress. Creators of online materials should not have to accrue the right to &#8220;adapt and modify&#8221; their works, forever and ever, world without end, in order to use online services. (I am certain Google will not allow us to &#8220;adapt and modify&#8221; the Google corporate logo!) This will continue to get in our way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dread Knight</title>
		<link>http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2008/09/14/toward-a-free-web/#comment-106</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dread Knight]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Sep 2008 23:18:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mdzlog.wordpress.com/?p=36#comment-106</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, there is a double edge for making LaunchPad.net open source. :-)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, there is a double edge for making LaunchPad.net open source. :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

