'GPL encumbrance problems' (jdow)

[Mike McCarty]

Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 21:56 -0800, jdow wrote:
> 
>>From: "Erwin Rol" <mailinglists at erwinrol.com>

[snip]

>>This seems to me to be too big a risk for
>>me to spend much of any time trying to make a living off GPL tainted
>>software.
> 
> Then you'd probably be better off not using Linux, OSX or one of the
> BSDs. All of them heavily use and depend upon GPL'ed SW.

Interestingly enough, I came to the same conclusion several years
ago, and accordingly recommended to my company (Alcatel) not to
use Linux in any products.

>> I might try to make a reputation with it. But I'd not expect
>>it to be the sole source of money to keep my computers powered let
>>alone keep me powered.
> 
> I seems to me as if you haven't understood the GPL and its importance to
> OpenSource and Linux in particular.

You do err, I fear. We *do* understand the importance, and how it
is *hindering* development and deployment of Linux. You seemingly
do not.

If you wanted *truly* open source, you would not use GPL, which is
the exact *opposite* of open source. It is extremely closely controlled
source. Truly open source would be PUBLIC DOMAIN.

The programs which I have really wanted others simply to use and
enjoy I have put into the public domain, so they would be used,
and played with, and enjoyed. Back in the days of the BBSs I put
several programs up with source IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN, so they
would be free.

You can find copies of changes to SMALL C, and Floating Point
Libraries for certain embedded microcontrollers in the public domain.

Now THAT is open source. Not the GPL, whose stated purpose is
the demise of capitalism, and the close guarding and control
of what people can do with source. [L]GPL is not really about
software at all, it is about a social agenda.

> Though you might not want to acknowledge it, without the GPL you
> wouldn't have Linux, and we all would be paying €€€€ fees for each piece
> of SW we want to use.

No, without the FSF and GPL we wouldn't have GNU, which is not
the same thing. Linux is a very small part of what is called "Linux".
And we *would* still have, e.g., Solaris, which is actually in many
ways superior to Linux, and which, due to [L]GPL is what I *did*
recommend, and what Alcatel actually uses in some of its equipment,
instead of Linux.

Mike
-- 
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!