GPL Infectiousness

[Robert Bushman]

On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Trent Shipley wrote:

> any effort I make that extends or otherwise depends on
> a GPLed good is likely wasted in economic terms.

Incorrect.  Economic utility is the sum of public
and private utility.

The private utility of GPL'd software is lower than
the private utility of proprietary software when
using the price theory system designed for industrial
goods (our current system).  This is significant--price
theory has not yet been adapted to information goods.
It does not, however, necessarily imply that there is
no possible (presently undiscovered) price theory that
would produce increased private utility from GPL'd
software than from proprietary software.

The public utility of GPL'd software (as it is
currently distributed) is equal to or greater than
proprietary software.  My gross utility from Linux
(since I do not hack the kernel) is a constant X,
independent of license.  If Linux were proprietary,
then my net utility would be X minus price (where
price is some non-negative number).  If Linux were
GPL, my net utility would be X minus zero.  The
latter is always equal to or greater than the former.
If price is non-zero or if the consumer avails him
or herself of the other benefits of the GPL (like
modification or redistribution), then the latter
is greater than the former.

Economic utility of GPL'd software relative to
proprietary software under industrial price theory
then is indeterminate.  Private utility decreases
and public utility increases or remains constant.
The question of economic utility requires knowing
the delta of each component.

Economic utility of GPL'd software under information
price theory is also indeterminate, since information
price theory has not yet been formalized.

> Greed may not be good, but it is necessary.

Incorrect.  Greed is good and unnecessary.

Greed is a reliable motivator.  As such, it has made
it possible to formalize industrial price theory.
Industrial price theory is responsible for much (if
not most) of the international economic growth of
the 1900's. Therefore greed is good.

Greed is not the only possible motivator.  Therefore,
if another reliable motivator exists (whether generally
or in specific markets) then greed is not generally
necessary.  Total motivation equals greed motivation
plus other motivation.  Total motivation is what
really matters - greed motivation is just the one that
is most well understood.

> [GPL] is hostile to capitalism.

Under industrial price theory.

> Unfortunately, if you want economic progress greed is a better engine than
> mere pride, laziness, or impatience -- and altruism barely merits
> consideration.

Given motivators:
M(g)  greed
M(p)  pride
M(l)  laziness
M(i)  impatience
M(a)  altruism
M(o)  other
M(t)  total

M(g) + M(p) + M(l) + M(i) + M(a) + M(o) = M(t)

But I think M(p,l,i,a,o) are small, so let's just
simplify that to:

M(g) = M(t)

May I safely assume that you are an engineer
not a mathematician?  While we're throwing out
small parameters, can we get rid of that stupid
.1415926535?  ;-)