<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>Dear Suchith,</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">My opinion is that OSGeo defines the value chain orientation of open software to ensure customers. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">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. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">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...</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">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. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Kiringai </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On 22 Mar 2017, at 23:15, Suchith Anand <<a href="mailto:Suchith.Anand@nottingham.ac.uk">Suchith.Anand@nottingham.ac.uk</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;" dir="ltr">
<p>Hi all,<br>
</p>
<br>
<p>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 ?<span>
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?</span>
<br>
</p>
<br>
<p>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
<span>properitery</span> software thinking it is open and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities?
<span>Is it right business ethics to do this?</span><br>
</p>
<br>
<p>Best wishes,<br>
</p>
<br>
Suchith<br>
<br>
<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software" class="OWAAutoLink" id="LPlnk311564" previewremoved="true">
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software</a> </p>
</div>
<pre>
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.
</pre>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Discuss mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org">Discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a></span><br><span><a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></span></div></blockquote></body></html>