Charles Stanhope

Charles Stanhope at

Sorry, I wasn't thinking only about a software business. I was thinking more broadly. In the current regulatory and philosophical approach to business, and putting on my "homo economicus" hat (which is ugly, ill fitting, and I hate wearing), I have a difficult time coming up with arguments that would persuade a corporation to support end-user freedom. While it may not be bad, it is also not obviously good in the bottom line way that shows up easily in spreadsheets.

Christopher Allan Webber has a good suggestion. My own suggestion would include transforming the very concept of a corporation to not be such a venal, valueless institution. But my suggestion is obviously ridiculous, so assuming no regulatory changes, how about:
  • Supporting end-user freedom can support customers' ability to move between vendors creating a more competitive marketplace (although competition doesn't necessarily benefit the corp. in a way it appreciates).
  • Supporting end-user freedom allows people to use software in ways the corp. may not have considered (thus increasing the size of the market).
  • Supporting end-user freedom can help you to reach future customers (e.g. students or institutions evaluating software).
  • Supporting end-user freedom allows customers and others to more readily contribute back (which reduces costs).
  • Supporting end-user freedom can help keep your competitors honest (assuming copyleft and assuming the corp. is willing to take action).
I'm sure there are others, but they're not leaping to mind. My imagination is apparently rather limited. :-/

We have to somehow put dollar figures (or the appropriate metric) on these things and see how the spreadsheet comes out. Of course, sometimes companies just have to try things to find out if the numbers work. Some corporations are more daring than others.

Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), Iñaki Arenaza, Nathan Willis likes this.