Sorry, I missed this troll when it originally must have passed by due
to a crappy newsfeed.
>> Herbert M Sauro <HSauro at fssc.demon.co.uk> writes:
> > <rmiller at house.med.und.ac.za> writes
> > >mine is free (www.biochem.ucl.ac.uk), others in that lab at least make
> > >it free for academic use. Remember that a great deal (most ?)
> > >of bioscience software is developed with grant funding.
> > >
> > It is certainly NOT free, I and all of us pay for it through our Taxes.
> > If you were to charge then we be paying for your software twice!
Well, since I now note that you're from the UK domain, you are correct
that it
was paid for by your taxes (but even more so by add-ons to your
pharmaceutical
prices, as I was mostly funded by Glaxo). My point, however, was that
it is
my impression that most bioscience software is developed with grant
funding,
**then sold** -- so, yes, you and I *do* pay twice (at least) for
so-called
commercial bioscience software.
Peter Rice wrote:
> There is generally no obligation to release most academic software. Nor is
> there any obligation to provide documentation and support. It is just
> that academics are such nice folk :-)
That's why we make such really big money ! :-)
rob.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert T. Miller, Ph.D.
rmiller at house.med.und.ac.za
Manager - Durban Satellite - South African National Bioinformatics
Institute
Faculty of Medicine / Dept of Virology / University of Natal
Private Bag 7 / Congella 4013 / Durban / South Africa
phone +27 (031) 3603743 fax +27 (031) 3603744 or
2604441
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
