[OT} How to un-GPL parts of a GPL'd module.

[Alex Martelli]

Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters wrote:
        ...
> if you don't realize it immediately.  It's always *things* that we are
> interested in utilizing for various purposes--even if those things have
> the fairly ethereal form of charges on a platter.

Nope, it's always _services_ -- even if those services are cheapest or
most practical to purchase as embodied in 'things'.  You can't really
frame, in terms of "it's always *things*", such "utilizing" as enjoying
a theatrical performance, a haircut, etc; the alternative framing of
"it's always _services_" has its sticky spots (when "things" are
_consumed_ in the process of "utilizing" -- bottle of wine being the
classic example) but requires a tad less mirror-climbing than
"it's always *things*" if you're keen for a GUT one way or another.

The key difference is in how you frame gray areas: the services-frame
helps you view "I purchase a car" as "I purchase a bundle of services
(embodied, for cheapness/practicality, in a thing)" and analyze the
bundle -- e.g. focusing just on transportation services, "convenient
transportation of self, others and goods from point A to point B at
any time without needing pre-arrangements in each case" might then
be further analyzed in terms of possible unbundling (would abundant
taxis available at any time supply a superior service, by avoiding
the chore of driving, or an inferior one, by removing the joy of
driving? -- etc).

While framing every purchase (&c) as one of services is clearly
an oversimplification, albeit somewhat of a lesser one wrt that of
framing every purchase (&c) as one of things, I think it's far more
fruitful for most purposes -- particularly when you're trying to
design and put together novel bundles and/or market then, but not
only then...

_My_ criticism of A. Smith is that he could not conceive of
services in such a generalized way -- as the core of all
economic activity, the true Wealth of Nations.  But considering
how many, 230 years later, STILL have problems with the notion,
it has to be a very muted and respectful criticism:-).


Alex