On 31 August 2014 05:24, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > On 8/30/2014 9:49 PM, Era Scarecrow wrote: >> >> >> Although M$ doing this seems more like a move in order to muscle their >> way in for other things. Take the actions of their actions regarding >> Novell. >> >> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/rms-why-gplv3.html >> >> [quote] >> Another threat that GPLv3 resists is that of patent deals like the >> Novell-Microsoft pact. Microsoft wants to use its thousands of patents >> to make users pay Microsoft for the privilege of running GNU/Linux, and >> made this pact to try to achieve that. The deal offers rather limited >> protection from Microsoft patents to Novell's customers. >> [/quote] >> >> It feels like they are trying to make a monopoly where they are the >> only ones able to make compilers, and anything with 'more useful >> features' have to pay them royalties or get a very expensive & limited >> license in order to be left alone. >> >> Of course there's other cases similar where idiots try to copyright >> the symbol pi, so they can then exploit it in order to sue companies and >> individuals for easy cash... > > > Y'know, that link above is a good example of why FSF and GPL bug me. > > Don't get me wrong, I'm not a "GPL vs BSD" guy. I genuinely believe both > have their place, and the difference lies in is what your, and your > project's, exact goals are. > > And I completely agree with the full extent of Stallman's famously > ultra-strict villainization of closed-box proprietary shackle-ware. That > shit pisses me off far more than it does most people. > > And I *do* appreciate that GPL, unlike BSD, can *realistically* be > cross-licensed with a commercial license in a meaningful way and used on > paid commercial software (at least, I *think* so, based on what little > anyone actually *can* comprehend of the incomprehensible GPL). >
GPL can be summarised in four simple freedoms. Nothing complicated there. In any case, you do know that there are paid gpl software too, right? Ardour is a good example of this. http://ardour.org/download.html > I *do* agree with Stallman's views, even most of the more extreme ones, I > *want* to like FSF and GPL, but... > > ...but then there's stuff like that link above. > > He keeps harping on how MS is being evil, and GPL v3 prevents the evil MS is > attempting...but jesus crap he *WILL NOT* spend ONE FUCKING WORD on > ***HOW*** the shit any of that supposedly works. We're supposed to just > blindly accept all of it just like the good little corporate whores he keeps > trying to crusade that we *shouldn't* be. Shit. > > The FSF constantly sounds just like one of those worthless pro-issue #XX / > anti-issue #XX asshats we have to put up with every voting season: <snip> Having spoken to RMS in person, I can say that you are far from the reality of their stance on promoting free software. This is the sort of attitude I'd expect from a sorely misunderstood teenager. Your heart might be in the right place, but your actually insulting both sides of the border. Iain.