[Ilugc] Employee Agreement of a FOSS company

ம. ஸ்ரீ ராமதாஸ்|Sri Ramadoss M amachu at ubuntu.com
Fri Dec 5 10:41:04 IST 2008

On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Arun Venkataswamy <arun289 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 12:24 PM, ம. ஸ்ரீ ராமதாஸ்|Sri Ramadoss M <
> amachu at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> While the sum of money is accumulated with the investor, the sum of
>> knowledge in the form individuals is extremely difficult to unite for
>> wide range of reasons, which the investors exploit (for individuals
>> involved seldom come together against investors' exploitation).
> I am sorry I can't understand the context of the term 'exploitation'. Do you
> mean to say that that in prop software companies - (a) In monitory terms,
> the investor makes way too much money and parts with very small amount to
> the employees and you belive this is wrong like a union? or (b) In
> knowledge/philosophy terms that the knowledge gained or IP generated in a
> project is 'owned' by the investor but not the employee? And the employee
> cannot use it for his or her own benifit?

my statement obviously is inclined towards (b) and on (a) at times
these days I feel Why not sixth pay commission's recommendation be
implemented even to the private sectors & a maximum wages act be
enacted :-)



We are in an era where, companies themselves are traded.

See what happened in recent Spectrum allocation. A nothing was given
everything and all that is happening we all know.. Err.. OT

The employees are not at all aware of what management does.. whether
it is trading the product developed or the company itself..

Let us take the example of SUSE. Not many of us would have opposed it
when it existed as SUSE. But Novell took over it. Makes an agreement
with M$ We find our own people boycotting it.

Time and again concerns are raised about KDE over QT, Trolltech's
acquisition by Nokia etc., How it will be in future etc.,

What happens, all those who would have contributed to a Free Software
project as employees/ contributors are destined to accept the
decisions of new management that takes over, which never ever put
efforts other than the money?

Sure, Employees with get Salary even from the new management but won't
FOSS be at stake.

There are other sides of  coin too. Sun which was another M$ by itself
realized advantages in being open and we all Welcome it now.

I have read GNU projects too asking the contributor to give the
copyright to GNU itself.

But we are sure from the recent statements of RMS at fsf-friends
mailing list that it is not going to be democratic in the sense that
it is not going to excise power. He is a Western Rishi himself :-)

Also it cannot be taken over as FOSS companies might be taken over by
other. What is the guarantee that a FOSS company has for its survival
that it won't be taken over by some one who might not FOSSY as its
predecessors were.

We do not have a common association that protects the interests FOSS
based companies to protect their common interests and thereby FOSS

We have this NASSCOM which says,

//Nasscom is the premier organisation that represents and sets the
tone for public policy for the Indian software industry.//

And it should not be allowed to set the tone and those in FOSS
business should set the tone, I wish.

It took a decision in favour of OOXML are reasons etc.,

More to ponder. I stop here for the moment.


Sri Ramadoss M

More information about the ilugc mailing list