Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

[Les Mikesell]

Francis Earl wrote:
>> Yes, it spreads like a virus as it takes away additional contributors 
>> choices of how their own work can be licensed...  But, since it can't 
>> ever provide functionality covered by patented code much of the 
>> development effort is simply a dead end.
> 
> 
> Yes, it ensures it's only used how the author and copyright owner of
> that code intends, DAMN THE BAD LUCK.

Perhaps it was only a tiny piece of code whose author had this 
restrictive intent.  Once the GPL has been applied, you can't know what 
anyone else intended because they no longer have a choice if they want 
to contribute at all.  Or, like X, the original work wasn't GPL'd at all.

> At least they can use the code,
> and modify it to their hearts content... they just can't steal it from
> the author who donated it to the community.

How could you steal something that was donated?  And copyright 
infringement isn't stealing anyway - it is copyright infringement.

> It can include functionality of patented code provided the patent owner
> allows it. There is nothing against that at all, in fact RedHat owns
> several patents that it allows everyone to use provided they play by the
> rules and don't act in a hostile mannor towards the community.

Anything could happen, I suppose.  I don't expect all technology patents 
to be donated to the public domain in my lifetime, so I expect I will 
always need a commercial OS and an assortment of programs with 
appropriate licenses.

> The nature of GPL code ensures the code is never truly dead, anyone can
> pick up the source, and hack on it to fit their requirements, and fork
> it to continue maintenance.

And it ensures it can't have all the functionality you are likely to 
need as long as there is technology covered by other, incompatible licenses.

-- 
    Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell at gmail.com