On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 00:30 -0400, Nick Holland wrote:
> Obviously you have missed some of my commentaries on the GPL vs. BSD
> philosophy. I don't hate the GPL. I dislike it compared to the BSD
> alternative in general (I dislike milk chocolate compared to dark
> chocolate, too, but either beats the heck out of, uh, most things. :)
> but the short version is, it boils down to which you fear more:
> Big Companies using your code and thus, you as a developer, without
> pay or allowing you to use their code.
> -- or --
> Big Companies NOT using your code, and rolling their own (inferior,
> incompatible, inconsistent, proprietary) crap instead.
A lot of big companies simply don't care. If there exists code they can
use without having to hire programmers, and without having to share
their modifications to the rest of the community, great. (And it still
amazes me that at least some big companies treat having to share under
the same conditions which let them get the code to begin with, to be
such a big deal.)
> I can make a pretty convincing case for either. However, as much as
> I'd dislike seeing Microsoft take OpenBSD code and ideas without
> compensation of any kind, I'd much prefer they use the code and ideas
> to not using 'em. But that's me. Not all may agree, and that's a
> good thing.
I'm sure they'd love to do it! Large companies like Microsoft *love* BSD
code. They can grab it, and at most, they have to give credit to the
developers in their advertisements and put the standard "AS IS" blurb in
the documentation.
> Your tone is similar to that of people who refuse to condemn the acts
> of vandals or killers simply because they are (loosely and self-
> proclaimed) of the same arbitrary group as they are. "An attack on
> them is an an attack on me, and we can't have that!"
I'm not saying the arbitrary removal of the original license from code
is wrong. I *am*, however, very much against the inexcusable slander of
the GNU project based on the views of a few (unfortunately)
less-than-scrupulous people.
> > Even though BSD-style licenses are compatible with the
> > GPL, there are perfectly acceptable social goals achieved only by
> > releasing under the GPL or a similar license.
>
> holy shit.
>
> The ends ("perfectly acceptable social goals") justify the means
> (theft of intellectual property)?
I never said this. If this is what you believe, state it as your own.
--
Shawn K. Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
