> (And again, I generally applaud the enthusiasm. But those things would better be suited as portfolio-building personal OSS projects on github rather than trying to squeeze the dollars.)
Why? They are under no obligation to do so, and then they are working for free. (A common trope related to FOSS, often argued on this very website)
> There is a difference between legitimate business interests after large investments, and freeloaders.
What large investment are you talking about? The thousands of hours of free labor that went ffmpeg? Yeah. See also all of the open source software that went into the operating system and utilities they built everything on. That doesn’t stop people from selling proprietary software, so why is this any different?
This is free market capitalism. If they can find people to pay $29 for a copy of this wrapper, more power to them. That also happens to be a much more powerful resume bullet point.
Why? They are under no obligation to do so, and then they are working for free. (A common trope related to FOSS, often argued on this very website)
> There is a difference between legitimate business interests after large investments, and freeloaders.
What large investment are you talking about? The thousands of hours of free labor that went ffmpeg? Yeah. See also all of the open source software that went into the operating system and utilities they built everything on. That doesn’t stop people from selling proprietary software, so why is this any different?
This is free market capitalism. If they can find people to pay $29 for a copy of this wrapper, more power to them. That also happens to be a much more powerful resume bullet point.