Re: Compare Linux and Freebsd Redux

From: Michel Talon (talon_at_lpthe.jussieu.fr)
Date: 05/28/04 

Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 06:45:26 +0000 (UTC)

John S. Dyson <toor@iquest.net> wrote:
> In article <10bdcem8tdo6v2e@corp.supernews.com>,
> "Neil Bradley" <nb_no_spam@synthcom.com> writes:
>> "krf" <krf@Vega.com> wrote in message
>> news:pan.2004.05.28.02.21.55.238893@Vega.com...
>>> By happy chance a Linux job came in over close to Dallas today (Thank you
>>> MS and SCO!!!) Sorry, I have to disagree with you guys who don't like the
>>> GPL controversy. I think it has been the greatest thing to happen to
>>> Linux (and I assume, other non-Redmond OS's).
>>
>> Well, GPL and Linux are two completely separate things. My beef with the GPL
>> is that it attaches politics to the license on what you can and can't do
>> with the code. The BSD license truly is free.
>>
> When looking at the attributes of the licenses, neither
> the free (e.g. BSDL) or redistribution encumbered (GPL) licenses
> force the redistribution of the software. So, any rhetoric
> about a license keeping the source code or binary code available
> is specious.
>

[snip]

I have discussed all that stuff with several French developers, and
beleive it or not, the argument most frequently put forward by GPL
proponents is that they *don't want their work to be exploited gratis*
by software firms like the most hated Microsoft. A monopolist who wants
to include GPL code will have either to open its derived work or pay the
author to relicense his code under a commercial license. This stuff
is a business model which works perfectly for people like Trolltech
or Mysql, which extract hefty royalties from commercial exploitation of
their work. This argument is perfectly sane and coherent and you
carefully avoid any mention of it. 

-- 
Michel TALON

Relevant Pages

  • [PATCH] change libata license from OSL+GPL to GPL
    ... - changes license of all code from OSL+GPL to plain ole GPL ... indicate your decision by deleting the provisions above and ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Copyleft and embedded Forth
    ... rights of another. ... Developer may do with p.d. ... Use isn't an issue with any free software license. ... You have to choose to use GPL software. ...
    (comp.lang.forth)
  • Re: module license taints kernel.
    ... you can't use a license ... At least this is how the GPL is ... you cannot use a license to turn actions that do not violate ... copyright law, not as defined in the GPL or in the common sense ...
    (comp.os.linux.development.system)
  • Re: GPL compliance
    ... Your main intent seems to be to spread FUD about the GPL and because ... every piece of code that is packaged has a copyright file. ... worrying only about the Canonical license for the whole CD and I was ... what does Red Hat have to do with it? ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: My python programs need a GUI, wxPython or PyQt4?
    ... boss buy) a commercial license. ... The Qt Open Source edition *IS* GPL and thus ... US copyright law does not draw a distinction between ... license - it is an interpretation by the FSF and that is all. ...
    (comp.lang.python)