<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Hi All, <br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 30/11/13 00:21, Vincent wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJan_WB4P8A7W+fXYcgsrPPkNkTqnS=Sx2FnMbCPis0=iMAYnQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Houps, it seems that I forget to follow this
message to the list...<br>
<div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 29/11/13 09:31, Vincent wrote:<br>
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="im">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"> </div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Just wanted to add that our
first minister Jean-Marc Ayrault has published a
famous circular related to free software where we
find this recommendation (page 17 of the
document):<br>
<blockquote><i>A simple rule to be applied would
be to reinject systematically from 5 to 10
percent of the avoided licensing costs. This
allows one to contribute in a useful way in
all cases, to not put at risk the economic
gain of using Free Software, without
systematically performing a thorough study of
comprehensive gain.<br>
</i></blockquote>
Full document available here (in english): <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.april.org/sites/default/files/20130319-ayrault-memorandum-english-translation.pdf"
target="_blank">http://www.april.org/sites/default/files/20130319-ayrault-memorandum-english-translation.pdf</a></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Great read, thanks for sharing. A couple of other topical excerpts,
with added emphasis:<br>
<i><br>
</i><i>"...Participation in dynamics of Free Software is linked to
contribution: the user, </i><i><b>especially the</b></i><i><b> </b></i><i><b>professional
user</b></i><i>, must not limit him- or herself to profiting
from the system; they must maintain the model by reinjecting a
part of their profits in one form or another"</i><br>
<br>
<i>"...Certain software vendors play at the margins of the Free
Software model, managing a version called “enterprise” or
“premium” under a proprietary classic license and a version called
“communal” under a Free license, which is, however, often out of
date compared to the other version. This is the model called
“Freemium”. These free software programs, driven by an editor more
than by a community, must be used with caution since they are at
constant risk of reverting to a proprietary mode</i><i>l"</i><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Maybe it would worth to try to ask them how
they could help Thunderbird and secure its development? But it
would require that we still have contacts there. Does anybody
know?</blockquote>
<br>
I think it's absolutely worth it. If the future of Thunderbird
really is as dire as all that, then seeking
sponsorship/support/alignment with existing organisations amenable
to free software would seem to be one logical course of action.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04/12/13 05:35, John Crisp wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:529E086F.8080104@safeandsoundit.co.uk"
type="cite">To be honest, I don't REALLY like them, but I
understand that something
has to be done. It isn't that palatable, then then what are the
other
choices? At least it is a step in the right direction.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
Two other suggestions have been made, one of which looking back
through the list archives has been raised before. Both however
require a lot more hard graft than landing an always-on donation
button in a future release.<br>
<br>
<br>
Cheers, <br>
Dave<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Dave Koelmeyer
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://blog.davekoelmeyer.co.nz">http://blog.davekoelmeyer.co.nz</a></pre>
</body>
</html>