[OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

[Kiringai Kamau]

Thanks Suchith....I love your passion!

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:37 PM, Suchith Anand <
Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:

> Kiringai and all,
>
> Thanks to all who send your feedbacks from different perspectives to my
> query.  Openness means being open to different perspectives ,ideas,
> viewpoints, cultures  and learning and improving to be a better human every
> day... We are all part of a big ecosystem all working for Geo. GeoForAll
> means Geo for All and we welcome everyone to be part of Openness in
> Education.
>
> The irony is that over 10 years back when i started putting my ideas and
> frameworks in place for Open Principles in Science and Education, some of
> the propertiery GIS vendors and thier supporters were laughing at me and
> doing thier best indirectly to stop me , but now it seems they are all
> working overtime trying to be Ambassodors of Openness!  Imitation is the
> sincerest form of flattery . What amazing changes happening and OSGeo has
> done great work to accelerate the pace of Open in all directions.  I
> welcome all to be part of the Open movement.
>
> One thing is clear . The Future of Geo is Open.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Suchith
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Kiringai Kamau <kiringai at gmail.com>
> Sent: 23 March 2017 4:28 AM
> To: Anand Suchith
> Cc: discuss at lists.osgeo.org; geoforall at lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to
> market thier properitery product as Open ?
>
> Dear Suchith,
>
> My opinion is that OSGeo defines the value chain orientation of open
> software to ensure customers.
>
> This will help customers to understand the elements/components that
> are/should be open and which are value added contributions of the vendor.
> All value added innovations of the vendor can/should be the revenue stream
> that the community can advocate for, and campaign against exploitation of
> those that unwittingly become targets of unscrupulous vendors.
>
> We can then leave the space of determining the value of the value added
> contribution to the private treaty of the two with the vendors encouraged
> to charge based on the intensity of the value add...
>
> If a subcommittee on value added innovations goes not exist, then it
> behaves us to create one...we do need this very much in Africa.
>
> Kiringai
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 22 Mar 2017, at 23:15, Suchith Anand <Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk
> <mailto:Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk>> wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier
> properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the
> organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the  properitery
> software thinking it is open have ?  The definision of Proprietary software
> [1] is very clearly defined, so  how can it be possible for any properitery
> GIS vendor to market their  software knowingly as open platform if it is
> properitery?
>
>
> This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source
> software companies .  Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that
> results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery
> software thinking it is open  and also to other companies who do true open
> source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right
> business ethics to do this?
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Suchith
>
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
>


-- 
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170329/6ecb2a49/attachment-0002.html>