It's not a secret that most if not all YC-funded startups are built on top of mountains of free code written by someone else. Nobody here pays for XML parsing libraries or POP3 implementations. But I am yet to see the code produced by YC-funded companies themselves.<p>Scribd, I want to use iPaper on my own site without using your servers. I think it will be beneficial to my customers. Since you took millions of free code for parsing all these pre-existing document formats, don't you think you owe to the community and should release your convert-to-flash code as well?<p>I know that GPL only covers the case of "distributing" software and running it on your own servers releases you from an obligation to give something back in return.<p>But does it really justify your behavior of being a parasite?
See below a list of OSS from YC companies.<p>This is clearly not the only way of giving back to the community. What about all the contributions they make to the projects they use. I believe scribd has stretched rails to limits beyond any other site and has made contributions from it. Adam from heroku just discussed a patch he submitted to rails too. The list goes on, I'm sure.<p>Also, you sound like you have used iPaper, a <i>free service</i> provided by Scribd. Perhaps you should consider an amicable request for an open version of iPaper (since that is obviously why you made this post) rather than calling YC companies <i>parasites</i>.
On a related note, I would be interested to hear what parts of your company's product you have opened.<p>I'll build a list:<p><a href="http://blog.reddit.com/2008/06/reddit-goes-open-source.html" rel="nofollow">http://blog.reddit.com/2008/06/reddit-goes-open-source.html</a><p><a href="http://portal.insoshi.com/" rel="nofollow">http://portal.insoshi.com/</a><p><a href="http://ycombinator.com/seriesaa.html" rel="nofollow">http://ycombinator.com/seriesaa.html</a><p><a href="http://www.webmin.com/index8.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.webmin.com/index8.html</a><p><a href="http://opensource.heroku.com/" rel="nofollow">http://opensource.heroku.com/</a><p><a href="http://trac.youos.com/" rel="nofollow">http://trac.youos.com/</a><p><a href="http://www.getdropbox.com/install?os=linux" rel="nofollow">http://www.getdropbox.com/install?os=linux</a><p><a href="http://www.xobni.com/about/opensource" rel="nofollow">http://www.xobni.com/about/opensource</a><p><a href="http://appjet.com/app/150996096/source" rel="nofollow">http://appjet.com/app/150996096/source</a>
(On open/free source licenses.) I came full circle back to GPL. If you see the glass half-full, the latest AGPL is a great option for a web startup to distribute their code. It would address the question from investors or plain MBA-style CEOs "How would you prevent a competitor from taking this code and making a better service on it?" while at the same time giving grounds for a community of competitors to factor their development costs. (Including debugging as development.)<p>I couldn't think of a scenario where somebody can argue they want to take an open/free source project, modifying it, and give a service online without redistributing the code. Well, unless if that person is an [insert your favourite derisive descriptor for anti-social people.]
>Since you took millions of free code for parsing all these pre-existing document formats, don't you think you owe to the community and should release your convert-to-flash code as well?<p>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't iPaper descended from Macromedia's Flashpaper? If so, they might not have the rights to open-source it even if they wanted to.