Frz,

I would just like to add a note to the discussion to say that, it is my understanding, that the GPL does not prevent you from selling something that is GPL'ed, but that you must provide the Source Code along with it, or at the request of the buyer, at no additional charge. See <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html">Selling Free Software</a>.

But I agree, putting any limitations on what someone can do with software that is supposedly 'free' is stupid. The GPL is not a good method of making things free. Just another way to control things and prevent anyone from making any significant money on anything they release under that license. Unless you count support, but for most people, charging for support is a bad business model. Makes it very difficult for anyone to introduce new and improved feature sets, because they are spending all of their time supporting a product instead of making new product.

Yeah since that post quite some time ago we've gone ahead and added
support for the GPL to our marketplace.

I do see some value to it. In real terms, it kinda feels like you give
the product away to developers who are smart enough to figure out how
to get it /use it on their own - and sell it to customers who aren't,
and will need support...

It hardly strikes me as the moral high-ground, which is odd because I
feel like to many that's what the GPL represents, but I do see why it
resonates well with software developers who are used to license fees
being just a bit more than the client wants to spend.

best wishes

Franz Maruna
CEO - concrete5.org
http://about.me/frz