Jacob Meuser wrote: > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 12:23:23PM +0300, Lars Nood?n wrote: >> Pau wrote: >>> ... I don't think it's a good idea to sow more discord >>> ...than what there's already... >> Most of what's there is probably not naturally occurring. >> >> Just to drive home that point, see p39, pp 45-55, and p 119 of >> plaintiff exhibit 3096 from Comes v Microsoft (the "Iowa case") >> http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf > > huh?
Ok. For the intentionally or unintentionally obtuse: 1) Both variants (and representative individuals e.g. RMS and Theo) encourage making useful software, using the software, and making money from the software. 2) Copyright statements (aka licenses) are just another tool. Different tools are needed to accomplish different tasks. Use the right tool for the right job. Get over it. 3) There is one difference between the two in one aspect of how 'freedom' is defined, especially in the context of software copyright statements. They're not going to agree, they don't have to agree. Get over it. 4) Other than that difference, there is great overlap between the chosen copyright statements. That appears to be the main idea behind Pau's comment. 5) Cultivating antagonism between allies *is* a key part of the strategy used by the main opponent to OpenBSD. It wastes resources. In contrast, constructive competition leads to improvement. Regards, -Lars
