Re: As the GPL fades

[Joel]

jellybean stonerfish  wrote:
>On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 09:18:39 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>>> Will you please tell me how you got that information?
>> 
>> Search in the projects for a wildcard (empty string or so, don't
>> remember right now what I did) and look at the license breakdown.
>
>Oh.  A strange method, but it works.


Downright trippy. :)

-- 
Joel Crump
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Hyman Rosen]

On 2/5/2010 3:57 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:

How did you find that link
It's certainly not mentioned by
http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp


I found it using a simple search on Verizon.com.
You can look for "MI424WR", or "Actiontec FiOS", or "GPL"
and probbaly others as well. One of the links found is
,
entitled "FiOS Internet - Wireless home networking with
an Actiontec MI424WR router" and that page contains a
link to the source code download and offer.
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[jellybean stonerfish]

On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 09:18:39 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:

>> Will you please tell me how you got that information?
> 
> Search in the projects for a wildcard (empty string or so, don't
> remember right now what I did) and look at the license breakdown.

Oh.  A strange method, but it works.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Chris Ahlstrom]

David Kastrup pulled this Usenet boner:

> Erik Funkenbusch  writes:
>
>>> That's not exactly "fading" in my book.
>
> 
>
> But "fade"?  That would be stupid.
>
> That would not even be accurate for Microsoft's internet server (what's
> it's name?  IIS or so?) which has about half the deployment as Apache.
> But being in second place is not the same as "faded".

It is for Microsoft!

-- 
Stay away from flying saucers today.
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[David Kastrup]

Erik Funkenbusch  writes:

> On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:50:26 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> Alexander Terekhov  writes:
>> 
>>> http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/
>>>
>>> --
>>> As the GPL fades
>>>
>>> Jay Lyman, January 28, 2010 @ 3:17 pm ET
>>>  
>>> We’re continuing to see signs that the dominant GPL open source license
>>> may be fading from favor among commercial open source software players.
>> 
>> Freshmeat:
>> 
>> Licenses
>> 
>>   GPL (20985)
>>
[...]
>> [...]
>> 
>> That's not exactly "fading" in my book.
>
> Who's to say that Freshmeat's license count is kept up to date, but
> let's assume it is.  By my count, that's more than 10,000 non-GPL
> licenses.  And since you don't list the counts from, say a year ago,
> we have no way of knowing if the overall ratio of GPL to non-GPL has
> gone down or up.
>
> So your post doesn't really say anything.

It doesn't say anything about the _trend_.  But "fade" is not just about
a trend.  It is about becoming irrelevant.

And at about 70% of the current license breakdown, this is a nonsensical
characterization.

Nobody say that "Internet Explorer" is "fading from favor among computer
users" even though Firefox has made a considerable dent in its usage
ratio.

But "fade"?  That would be stupid.

That would not even be accurate for Microsoft's internet server (what's
it's name?  IIS or so?) which has about half the deployment as Apache.
But being in second place is not the same as "faded".

-- 
David Kastrup
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[David Kastrup]

jellybean stonerfish  writes:

> On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:50:26 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>
>> Freshmeat:
>> 
>> Licenses
>> 
>>   GPL (20985)
>>   LGPL (3245)
> 
>>   Artistic (565)
>>   Other (496)
>> [...]
>> 
>
>
> Will you please tell me how you got that information?

Search in the projects for a wildcard (empty string or so, don't
remember right now what I did) and look at the license breakdown.

-- 
David Kastrup
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[jellybean stonerfish]

On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:50:26 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:


> Freshmeat:
> 
> Licenses
> 
>   GPL (20985)
>   LGPL (3245)

>   Artistic (565)
>   Other (496)
> [...]
> 


Will you please tell me how you got that information?
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Erik Funkenbusch]

On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:50:26 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:

> Alexander Terekhov  writes:
> 
>> http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/
>>
>> --
>> As the GPL fades
>>
>> Jay Lyman, January 28, 2010 @ 3:17 pm ET
>>  
>> We’re continuing to see signs that the dominant GPL open source license
>> may be fading from favor among commercial open source software players.
> 
> Freshmeat:
> 
> Licenses
> 
>   GPL (20985)
>   LGPL (3245)
>   BSD Revised (1477)
>   GPLv3 (1422)
>   BSD Original (1405)
>   GPLv2 (1363)
>   Freeware (1262)
>   MIT/X (1009)
>   Apache 2.0 (637)
>   Public Domain (605)
>   Artistic (565)
>   Other (496)
> [...]
> 
> That's not exactly "fading" in my book.

Who's to say that Freshmeat's license count is kept up to date, but let's
assume it is.  By my count, that's  more than 10,000 non-GPL licenses.  And
since you don't list the counts from, say a year ago, we have no way of
knowing if the overall ratio of GPL to non-GPL has gone down or up.

So your post doesn't really say anything.
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Lusotec]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/
> ------
> As the GPL fades
> (...)

GPL is only the most used license for new and existing OSS projects, by a 
large margin. How exactly is GPL fading?

Regards.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Rick]

On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 12:31:42 +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:

> http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/
> 
> ------
> As the GPL fades
> 
> Jay Lyman, January 28, 2010 @ 3:17 pm ET
>  
> We’re continuing to see signs that the dominant GPL open source license
> may be fading from favor among commercial open source software players.
> The latest move away from the GPL comes from content management software
> vendor Alfresco, which is moving to the LGPL after originally releasing
> its code under the GPL three years ago. The reasoning for the shift,
> according to Alfresco CEO John Newton, is the company sees greater
> opportunity beyond being a software application, particularly given the
> emergence of the Content Management Interoperability Services standard.
> Alfresco won mostly praise for its move, and it does make sense given
> where open source is going these days.
> 
> I believe the emerging trend away from GPL and toward more permissive,
> mixable licenses such as LGPL or Apache reflects the broadening out of
> open source software not only throughout the enterprise IT software
> stack, but also throughout uses beyond individual applications,
> frameworks and systems. More and more open source software vendors are
> pursuing opportunities in embedded use or OEM deals whereby open source
> software often must sit alongside or even inside of proprietary code and
> products. Similar to what we’ve seen in the mobile space — where open
> source software and development are more prominent than ever, but end
> products with accessible code are not — open source is broadening out,
> but it is doing so in many cases by integrating with proprietary code.
> 
> We also see some debate about the community and commercial ups and downs
> of GPL as organizations contemplate the balance of the two and the best
> way to achieve commercial success with open source software. As Matt
> highlights, we are seeing a choice of non-GPL licensing in order to more
> effectively foster community and third-party involvement, but we also
> continue to see GPL as a top choice to similarly build community.
> 
> While the debate about community versus commercial benefit may not
> necessarily be prompting movement away from GPL, I believe another
> recent action may indeed do so. The latest series of GPL lawsuits are
> aimed at raising awareness, profile and legitimacy for open source
> software. While those bringing the suits — primarily the Software
> Freedom Law Center — have exhibited a reasonable approach and settled
> with past lawsuit targets, these suits and publicity may still serve to
> steer organizations making the choice to other licenses, including the
> LGPL, BSD, Apache and the Eclipse Public License.
> 
> Another factor is the GPL thumping that took place during the SaveMySQL
> campaign as the European Commission contemplated Oracle’s proposed (and
> now closed) acquisition of Sun Microsystems and the open source MySQL. I
> voiced my concern that the SaveMySQL campaign might jeopardize or
> de-value open source software projects and pieces in M&A, but I believe
> I’m actually in agreement with SaveMySQL leader Monty Widenius that the
> deal and process may end up tarnishing the GPL and its reputation in the
> enterprise.
> 
> As stated above, much of the movement we’re seeing away from the GPL has
> to do with the desire and opportunity to place open source software
> alongside, within, on top of or otherwise with proprietary software.
> Non-GPL open source licenses are also more flexible in terms of
> integrating and bundling with other open source software licensed under
> other, non-GPL licenses.
> 
> We anticipated this fade of GPL as covered in our report, The Myth of
> Open Source License Proliferation. Given its clout, durability and
> continued popularity in commercial open source (and with help from
> continued growth of GPL-licensed Linux) we believe the GPL will endure
> as a top open source license. However, given their flexibility and the
> ability to combine with other code, we see a number of other challengers
> — Apache, BSD, EPL and LGPL — rising while GPL dominance wanes. We’re
> also watching to see whether the AGPLv3 for networked software will
> provide new life for GPL-style licensing and community building in
> emerging virtualized, SaaS and cloud computing environments. --
> 
> regards,
> alexander.


Is the GPL being used less, or are more people writing proprietary 
software based on non-GPL OSS licenses. Big difference.

-- 
Rick
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Hyman Rosen]

On 2/5/2010 2:47 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> There was no settlement (agreement between defendant and plaintiff) in
> Verizon case you retard Hyman.

Not being privy to the negotiations, I can only look at the
external evidence. The SFLC filed a lawsuit against Verizon
for not being in compliance with the GPL. The lawsuit is
ended, and Verizon is now in compliance with the GPL. The
reasonable conclusion to draw is that the compliance came
about as the result of the suit.

Since the entire goal of such lawsuits is to compel compliance
with the GPL when GPLed code is copied and distributed, it is
also reasonable to proclaim success when compliance occurs.

> Verizon is still blatantly breaching the GPL as it can be witnessed at
> http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp

Verizon is no longer infringing the GPL.
They are now providing the sources here:

and shipping a manual and disk with their routers which
apprises users of their rights under the GPL. A copy of
the Verizon-branded and Verizon-copyrighted manual can
be read here:

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Hyman Rosen]

On 2/5/2010 2:47 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:

There was no settlement (agreement between defendant and plaintiff) in
Verizon case you retard Hyman.


Not being privy to the negotiations, I can only look at the
external evidence. The SFLC filed a lawsuit against Verizon
for not being in compliance with the GPL. The lawsuit is
ended, and Verizon is now in compliance with the GPL. The
reasonable conclusion to draw is that the compliance came
about as the result of the suit.

Since the entire goal of such lawsuits is to compel compliance
with the GPL when GPLed code is copied and distributed, it is
also reasonable to proclaim success when compliance occurs.


Verizon is still blatantly breaching the GPL as it can be witnessed at
http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp


Verizon is no longer infringing the GPL.
They are now providing the sources here:

and shipping a manual and disk with their routers which
apprises users of their rights under the GPL. A copy of
the Verizon-branded and Verizon-copyrighted manual can
be read here:

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[David Kastrup]

Hyman Rosen  writes:

> On 2/5/2010 1:50 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>> They "doesnt-know":
>> http://blog.internetnews.com/skerner/2008/06/verizon-ceo-doesnt-know-about.html
>
> As I've said before, everyone agrees that the GPL is
> a perfectly valid copyright license,

Oh, I disagree.  The GPL does not touch or regulate copyright.  It is a
license that gives you rights that copyright would not.  "Copyright" is
a law.  You can't license it.  There are _contracts_ (like the Microsoft
EULA) that try to get a party to _relinquish_ rights it would have under
copyright.  _That_ sort of "license" tampers with copyright.  The GPL
does not.

-- 
David Kastrup
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Alexander Terekhov]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> 
> On 2/5/2010 3:45 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > Hyman Rosen wrote:
> >> Verizon is no longer infringing the GPL.
> > LOL!
> > Sez who?
> > Verizon is still blatantly breaching the GPL as it can be witnessed at
> > http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp
> 
> No. They are now providing the sources here: 

How did you find that link, moron Hyman?

It's certainly not mentioned by

http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp

regards,
alexander.

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Hyman Rosen]

On 2/5/2010 3:45 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:

Hyman Rosen wrote:

Verizon is no longer infringing the GPL.

LOL!
Sez who?
Verizon is still blatantly breaching the GPL as it can be witnessed at
http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp


No. They are now providing the sources here:

and shipping a manual and disk with their routers which
apprises users of their rights under the GPL. A copy of
the Verizon-branded and Verizon-copyrighted manual can
be read here:

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Alexander Terekhov]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
[...]
> Verizon is no longer infringing the GPL.

LOL!

Sez who?

Verizon is still blatantly breaching the GPL as it can be witnessed at 

http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp

regards,
alexander.

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Hyman Rosen]

On 2/5/2010 2:47 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> There was no settlement (agreement between defendant and plaintiff) in
> Verizon case you retard Hyman.

Not being privy to the negotiations, I can only look at the
external evidence. The SFLC filed a lawsuit against Verizon
for not being in compliance with the GPL. The lawsuit is
ended, and Verizon is now in compliance with the GPL. The
reasonable conclusion to draw is that the compliance came
about as the result of the suit.

Since the entire goal of such lawsuits is to compel compliance
with the GPL when GPLed code is copied and distributed, it is
also reasonable to proclaim success when compliance occurs.

> Verizon is still blatantly breaching the GPL as it can be witnessed at
> http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp

Verizon is no longer infringing the GPL.
They are now providing the sources here:

and shipping a manual and disk with their routers which
apprises users of their rights under the GPL. A copy of
the Verizon-branded and Verizon-copyrighted manual can
be read here:

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Alexander Terekhov]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
[...]
> dismissed their case with prejudice once a settlement was
> reached. 

There was no settlement (agreement between defendant and plaintiff) in
Verizon case you retard Hyman.

Verizon is still blatantly breaching the GPL as it can be witnessed at 

http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp

Stop being utter MORON Hyman.

regards,
alexander.

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Hyman Rosen]

On 2/5/2010 1:50 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:

They "doesnt-know":
http://blog.internetnews.com/skerner/2008/06/verizon-ceo-doesnt-know-about.html


As I've said before, everyone agrees that the GPL is
a perfectly valid copyright license, and typical
breaches are due to laziness and inattention, not
willfulness. If this case had had the attention of
someone high in the hierarchy, there would have been
no case necessary to begin with.

Verizon knows about the GPL now.


To wit, Verizon is still blatantly breaching the GPL at
http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp
and the complaint about it
http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2007/dec/07/busybox/verizon.pdf

"11. Upon information and belief, Verizon distributes to its
customers the Actiontec MI424WR wireless router (“Infringing
Product”), which contains embedded executable software
(“Firmware”). Defendant also provides the Firmware corresponding
to the Infringing Product for download viaits website, at
http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp.";

was dismissed with prejudice against plaintiffs without any settlement
-- no agreement with the defendant.


Verizon is no longer infringing the GPL, having settled
the case. They are now providing the sources here:

and shipping a manual and disk with their routers which
apprises users of their rights under the GPL. A copy of
the Verizon-branded and Verizon-copyrighted manual can
be read here:


It is a deliberate misstatement to say "was dismissed
with prejudice against plaintiffs". Rather, the plaintiffs
dismissed their case with prejudice once a settlement was
reached. Dismissal with prejudice is routine in settlements
to reassure defendants that plaintiffs will not attempt to
refile the case.



___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[RJack]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

On 2/5/2010 1:02 PM, RJack wrote:

The SFLC filed seven consecutive BusyBox lawsuits without the

 > underlying works being registered with the U.S. Copyright Office
 > -- this fact rendered those frivolous lawsuits without standing
 > to be heard by a federal court:

And yet, in every single case filed by the SFLC, the defendants
decided to come into compliance with the GPL. Perhaps they know
something that you choose to ignore.


I predict the SFLC can prevent the legal interpretation of the

 > GPL by a federal court for another twenty years.

Federal courts will never need to interpret the GPL, because its
meaning is straightforward and its terms are easily honored.  In
the various cases filed by the SFLC, the problem has been laziness,
not deliberate lack of compliance. Once the defendant's attention
is focused by a lawsuit, compliance quickly follows.


"The Captain's scared them out of the water!" -- again. ROFL


Large companies such as Microsoft understand that the GPL is a valid
license whose terms must be honored. That is why they are careful to
avoid it if they wish not to be bound by its terms:



Sincerely,
RJack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Alexander Terekhov]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> 
> On 2/5/2010 1:02 PM, RJack wrote:
> > The SFLC filed seven consecutive BusyBox lawsuits without the
>  > underlying works being registered with the U.S. Copyright Office
>  > -- this fact rendered those frivolous lawsuits without standing
>  > to be heard by a federal court:
> 
> And yet, in every single case filed by the SFLC, the defendants
> decided to come into compliance with the GPL. Perhaps they know

They "doesnt-know":

http://blog.internetnews.com/skerner/2008/06/verizon-ceo-doesnt-know-about.html

To wit, Verizon is still blatantly breaching the GPL at 

http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp

and the complaint about it 

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2007/dec/07/busybox/verizon.pdf

"11. Upon information and belief, Verizon distributes to its 
customers the Actiontec MI424WR wireless router (“Infringing 
Product”), which contains embedded executable software 
(“Firmware”). Defendant also provides the Firmware corresponding 
to the Infringing Product for download viaits website, at 
http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp.";

was dismissed with prejudice against plaintiffs without any settlement
-- no agreement with the defendant.

Stop being utter MORON Hyman.

regards,
alexander.

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[David Kastrup]

RJack  writes:

> Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
>> Rubbish.  People have been predicting the death of the GPL for 20
>> years, and in 20 years time they'll still be predictig its death.
>>
>
> Despite a concerted web-wide astroturf campaign by Free Softies
> predicting the legal enforceability of the GPL in the good old USA,
> nothing could be farther from the truth.

Strawman.  The GPL is not enforceable.  It says itself:

  9. Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.

  You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or
run a copy of the Program.  Ancillary propagation of a covered work
occurring solely as a consequence of using peer-to-peer transmission
to receive a copy likewise does not require acceptance.  However,
nothing other than this License grants you permission to propagate
or modify any covered work.  These actions infringe copyright if you
do not accept this License.  Therefore, by modifying or propagating
a covered work, you indicate your acceptance of this License to do
so.

The GPL can't be enforced.  Copyright can.  The GPL gives you additional
permissions.  If you don't want them, you don't need to take them.  If
you are not in compliance with the GPL's conditions, the GPL is an
irrelevant piece of paper.  But copyright remains relevant.  The GPL
can't be enforced.  And nobody claimed it could.  It says itself so.

> The SFLC filed seven consecutive BusyBox lawsuits without the
> underlying works being registered with the U.S. Copyright Office --
> this fact rendered those frivolous lawsuits without standing to be
> heard by a federal court:

Why don't you tell that to the defendants that settled and came into
compliance?

> Free Softies have lost all sense of self-respect. I predict the SFLC
> can prevent the legal interpretation of the GPL by a federal court for
> another twenty years.

Not unlikely, since its wording is sound enough not to require a judge
to understand it.  And so its unlikely for defendants to claim
compliance when the plaintiff thinks otherwise.

And indeed the cases up to now have been about copyright infringement.

-- 
David Kastrup
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Snit]

Rick stated in post 15idne5s_u3ylphwnz2dnuvz_jvi4...@supernews.com on 2/5/10
5:05 AM:

>> We anticipated this fade of GPL as covered in our report, The Myth of
>> Open Source License Proliferation. Given its clout, durability and
>> continued popularity in commercial open source (and with help from
>> continued growth of GPL-licensed Linux) we believe the GPL will endure
>> as a top open source license. However, given their flexibility and the
>> ability to combine with other code, we see a number of other challengers
>> ? Apache, BSD, EPL and LGPL ? rising while GPL dominance wanes. We?re
>> also watching to see whether the AGPLv3 for networked software will
>> provide new life for GPL-style licensing and community building in
>> emerging virtualized, SaaS and cloud computing environments. --
>> 
>> regards,
>> alexander.
> 
> 
> Is the GPL being used less, or are more people writing proprietary
> software based on non-GPL OSS licenses. Big difference.

A difference similar to the difference of market share and user base.  OK.


-- 
[INSERT .SIG HERE]


___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Hyman Rosen]

On 2/5/2010 1:02 PM, RJack wrote:

The SFLC filed seven consecutive BusyBox lawsuits without the

> underlying works being registered with the U.S. Copyright Office
> -- this fact rendered those frivolous lawsuits without standing
> to be heard by a federal court:

And yet, in every single case filed by the SFLC, the defendants
decided to come into compliance with the GPL. Perhaps they know
something that you choose to ignore.


I predict the SFLC can prevent the legal interpretation of the

> GPL by a federal court for another twenty years.

Federal courts will never need to interpret the GPL, because its
meaning is straightforward and its terms are easily honored. In
the various cases filed by the SFLC, the problem has been laziness,
not deliberate lack of compliance. Once the defendant's attention
is focused by a lawsuit, compliance quickly follows.

Large companies such as Microsoft understand that the GPL is a valid
license whose terms must be honored. That is why they are careful to
avoid it if they wish not to be bound by its terms:

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[RJack]

Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:

Rubbish.  People have been predicting the death of the GPL for 20
years, and in 20 years time they'll still be predictig its death.



Despite a concerted web-wide astroturf campaign by Free Softies
predicting the legal enforceability of the GPL in the good old USA,
nothing could be farther from the truth. The SFLC filed seven
consecutive BusyBox lawsuits without the underlying works being
registered with the U.S. Copyright Office -- this fact rendered those
frivolous lawsuits without standing to be heard by a federal court:

"Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 411(a) as well as its predecessor, § 13, it has
been held repeatedly that ownership of a copyright registration is a
jurisidictional prerequisite to an action for infringement. . . . A
complaint which fails to plead compliance with § 411(a) is defective and
subject to dismissal."; Techniques, Inc. v. Rohn, 592 F.Supp. 1195,
1197; 225 U.S.P.Q. 741 (S.D.N.Y. 1984).

To remedy the standing problem the SFLC plaintiff filed a criminally
fraudulent copyright registration claiming ownership of code he clearly
doesn't own -- just ask Bruce Perens and about twenty other BusyBox
developers.

It would be a breath of fresh air to hear someone like yourself admit
that no lawsuit ever filed by the SFLC has ever made it farther than a
voluntary dismissal by the plaintiffs *and* prior to a federal judge
ever reading a single word of the frivolous Complaint. The idiotic
claims of "victory" that follow these dismissals by the SFLC remind me
of the movie scene in "The Hunt for Red October" where the submarine
Dallas abruptly sounds and a rescued Russian midshipman exclaims, "The
Captain's scared them out of the water!"
http://www.fini.tv/blog/finishing_line_files/a44f9390355368f87dc47b7ec094f93e-36.php

Free Softies have lost all sense of self-respect. I predict the SFLC can
prevent the legal interpretation of the GPL by a federal court for
another twenty years.

Free Softies should try really, really try hard to understand the
principle alluded to in the saying "Bullshit walks and money talks".

Sincerely,
RJack :)


___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[John Hasler]

jellybean stonerfish writes:
> ...trying to prove Stalman and the fsf are cult leaders.

David Kastrup writes:
> Uh, I can consider a lot of plausible definitions for "cult leaders"
> where I would not disagree with that idea.

I agree, but that's utterly irrelevant to the legal significance of the
GPL model license.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Mark Kent]

David Kastrup  espoused:
> Alexander Terekhov  writes:
>
>> http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/
>>
>> --
>> As the GPL fades
>>
>> Jay Lyman, January 28, 2010 @ 3:17 pm ET
>>  
>> We’re continuing to see signs that the dominant GPL open source license
>> may be fading from favor among commercial open source software players.
>
> Freshmeat:
>
> Licenses
>
>   GPL (20985)
>   LGPL (3245)
>   BSD Revised (1477)
>   GPLv3 (1422)
>   BSD Original (1405)
>   GPLv2 (1363)
>   Freeware (1262)
>   MIT/X (1009)
>   Apache 2.0 (637)
>   Public Domain (605)
>   Artistic (565)
>   Other (496)
> [...]
>
> That's not exactly "fading" in my book.
>

Usual Terekhov material.  But read the article more carefully, it's
about "commercial open source software players", well, what on earth
does that mean?

I suspect it's confined to those projects and companies which have used
the GPL and then moved to something less open in order to pursue some
specific commercial goal around exploiting those people who've chosen to
use the projects in question.

These activities will probably fail.

-- 
| mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk   |
| Cola faq:  http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/   |
| Cola trolls:  http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/|
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in.  Own your Own services!   |

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[David Kastrup]

jellybean stonerfish  writes:

> On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:49:27 -0200, Victor Cortiano wrote:
>
>> I've seen your GNG website. Your arguments are ridiculously flawed.
>> You're just another narrow-minded person who dislikes rms because of
>> his beard, his clothes and his philosophy.
>
> The site is kind of funny, yet sad.  It is full of babble and
> nonsense.  It is obvious that he is a nut, stuck in a mental loop,
> trying to prove Stalman and the fsf are cult leaders.

Uh, I can consider a lot of plausible definitions for "cult leaders"
where I would not disagree with that idea.

I am not interested in his web site, but around here he is more occupied
with proving everybody else (in particular Stallman and the FSF) to be a
delusional maniac rather than a cult leader.

And it is reasonably easy to see a delusional maniac when he writes
about them...

-- 
David Kastrup
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Hyman Rosen]

On 2/5/2010 11:29 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

No.  You're doing something positive.


One man's negative is another's positive. For example,
people who are campaigning against Debian's inclusion of
C# and Mono 
think they're doing something positive. So do people who
are supporting that inclusion.

> You do this for fun?

Of course. Didn't you get that cartoon about "Someone is
_wrong_ on the internet."? 
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[jellybean stonerfish]

On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:49:27 -0200, Victor Cortiano wrote:

> I've seen your GNG website. Your arguments are ridiculously flawed.
> You're just another narrow-minded person who dislikes rms because of his
> beard, his clothes and his philosophy.

The site is kind of funny, yet sad.  It is full of babble and nonsense.
It is obvious that he is a nut, stuck in a mental loop, trying to prove
Stalman and the fsf are cult leaders.  Notice how if you click on a link
for more evidence or more information, the link brings you to a page saying
the same thing over again, still with no evidence or information.  

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Victor Cortiano]

John Hasler:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/common-distros.html#BSD



___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Alan Mackenzie]

In gnu.misc.discuss Hyman Rosen  wrote:
> On 2/5/2010 9:18 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>> Alexander, who pays you to post in this forum, and how much?

> You're being silly. You may as well ask who is paying me to answer him.

No.  You're doing something positive.  I can understand somebody doing
something for love year after year.  Many of us maintain free software.
I can't imagine any half-way normal person doing something out of hate
for more than a few weeks or months.  Terekhov's been at it for the best
part of a decade, possibly longer.

> We all just do it because it's fun.

You do this for fun?

> Besides, how much would you expect someone to pay to reach the
> approximately ten people who still read this newsgroup?

It's more than that.  There've been around 10 people who've contributed
to the threads in the last few days.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[John Hasler]

Victor Cortiano writes:
> Alexander, you're just another OpenBSD zealot who dislikes the fact
> that OpenBSD is not considered free by FSF's guidelines.

OpenBSD _is_ considered Free by the FSF.  The original BSD license is
not compatible with the GPL, but that does not make it non-free.  The
revised BSD license is compatible with the GPL.  See
.

> Besides, OpenBSD uses the revised BSD license for the stated purpose
> of allowing "commercial use" of its software.  That "commercial"
> actually means proprietary software.

That does not make it non-free.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Hyman Rosen]

On 2/5/2010 9:18 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

Alexander, who pays you to post in this forum, and how much?


You're being silly. You may as well ask who is paying me
to answer him. We all just do it because it's fun. Besides,
how much would you expect someone to pay to reach the
approximately ten people who still read this newsgroup?

:-)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Alan Mackenzie]

In gnu.misc.discuss Alexander Terekhov  wrote:

> Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> [...]
>> No, not really.  He's a bright lad, and an Internet search reveals he has
>> at least one bogus patent to his name (something to do with a storage

> Uh, why bogus, Alan?

It's a software algorithm, isn't it?  They're bogus.

> BTW, I've got two patents (as coinventor):

OK, two half-patents, then.  ;-)

>> So, Alex, who's paying you for this, and how much?

> 3.52 million free dollars from GNG MegaCorp.

Nice evasion.  A bit predictable, though.

> regards,
> alexander.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Alexander Terekhov]

Alan Mackenzie wrote:
[...]
> No, not really.  He's a bright lad, and an Internet search reveals he has
> at least one bogus patent to his name (something to do with a storage

Uh, why bogus, Alan?

BTW, I've got two patents (as coinventor):

http://www.patentstorm.us/inventors-patents/Alexander_Terekhov/1454418/1.html

> algorithm).  He could surely find something positive, enriching and
> fulfilling to do with his time.  Boeblingen is not such a bad place.
> 
> So, Alex, who's paying you for this, and how much?

3.52 million free dollars from GNG MegaCorp.

http://gng.z505.com/about.htm

Stop trolling Mackenzie.

regards,
alexander.

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Victor Cortiano]

Alan, that would explain a lot.


___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Victor Cortiano]

Alexander, you're just another OpenBSD zealot who dislikes the fact
that OpenBSD is not considered free by FSF's guidelines.

Besides suggesting proprietary software in one of its ports, Theo de Radt
explicitly accepts non-free firmware. Besides, OpenBSD uses the revised
BSD license for the stated purpose of allowing "commercial use" of its
software. That "commercial" actually means proprietary software. I'm not
against the revised BSD license or any other non-copyleft free license,
but in this case that means they don't see any problem with proprietary
software.

That means GNU and OpenBSD have different views, so I don't know why so
many people from OpenBSD are whining about it being considered non-free
by FSF.

I've seen your GNG website. Your arguments are ridiculously flawed. You're
just another narrow-minded person who dislikes rms because of his beard,
his clothes and his philosophy.

Please, go whine elsewhere.


___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[David Kastrup]

Alan Mackenzie  writes:

> In gnu.misc.discuss David Kastrup  wrote:
>> Alan Mackenzie  writes:
>
>>> Alexander, who pays you to post in this forum, and how much?
>
>> Oh please.  Who would pay for that kind of nonsense?
>
> Any company that wishes to discourage GPL software.  Since calm
> logical discussion is ineffective against the GPL (for obvious
> reasons), they must resort to misdirection, sleight of hand, smoke and
> mirrors.

But it is all so obvious.  If anybody would be paying him, then for
distracting important developers into wasting time with him.  But I
don't think that this happens much.

If this supposed to be business one time, he is still stuck in the
prototyping stage.

> No, not really.  He's a bright lad, and an Internet search reveals he
> has at least one bogus patent to his name (something to do with a
> storage algorithm).  He could surely find something positive,
> enriching and fulfilling to do with his time.

Why should he?  Nobody else does.

I mean, get real.  Do you know how many TV sets and cigarettes are sold
around here?

This society is not focused about doing something positive, enriching
and fulfilling with your time.  It is focused about getting rid of it.
And when you spend it by annoying other people, at least you have a
receipt to show.  Beats lung cancer.

I don't think anybody pays him.

-- 
David Kastrup
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Alan Mackenzie]

In gnu.misc.discuss David Kastrup  wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie  writes:

>> In gnu.misc.discuss Alexander Terekhov  wrote:
>>> http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/

>>> --
>>> As the GPL fades

>>> Jay Lyman, January 28, 2010 @ 3:17 pm ET

>>> We're continuing to see signs that the dominant GPL open source license
>>> may be fading from favor among commercial open source software
>>> players...

>> Alexander, who pays you to post in this forum, and how much?

> Oh please.  Who would pay for that kind of nonsense?

Any company that wishes to discourage GPL software.  Since calm logical
discussion is ineffective against the GPL (for obvious reasons), they
must resort to misdirection, sleight of hand, smoke and mirrors.

> Can't you imagine that it's a work of hate for him?  Worthless all on
> its own?

No, not really.  He's a bright lad, and an Internet search reveals he has
at least one bogus patent to his name (something to do with a storage
algorithm).  He could surely find something positive, enriching and
fulfilling to do with his time.  Boeblingen is not such a bad place.

So, Alex, who's paying you for this, and how much?

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Rex Ballard]

On Feb 5, 7:05 am, Rick  wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 12:31:42 +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> >http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/
>
> > ------
> > As the GPL fades
>
> > Jay Lyman, January 28, 2010 @ 3:17 pm ET
>
> > We’re continuing to see signs that the dominant GPL open source license
> > may be fading from favor among commercial open source software players.
> > The latest move away from the GPL comes from content management software
> > vendor Alfresco, which is moving to the LGPL after originally releasing
> > its code under the GPL three years ago. The reasoning for the shift,
> > according to Alfresco CEO John Newton, is the company sees greater
> > opportunity beyond being a software application, particularly given the
> > emergence of the Content Management Interoperability Services standard.
> > Alfresco won mostly praise for its move, and it does make sense given
> > where open source is going these days.
>
> > I believe the emerging trend away from GPL and toward more permissive,
> > mixable licenses such as LGPL or Apache reflects the broadening out of
> > open source software not only throughout the enterprise IT software
> > stack, but also throughout uses beyond individual applications,
> > frameworks and systems. More and more open source software vendors are
> > pursuing opportunities in embedded use or OEM deals whereby open source
> > software often must sit alongside or even inside of proprietary code and
> > products. Similar to what we’ve seen in the mobile space — where open
> > source software and development are more prominent than ever, but end
> > products with accessible code are not — open source is broadening out,
> > but it is doing so in many cases by integrating with proprietary code.
>
> > We also see some debate about the community and commercial ups and downs
> > of GPL as organizations contemplate the balance of the two and the best
> > way to achieve commercial success with open source software. As Matt
> > highlights, we are seeing a choice of non-GPL licensing in order to more
> > effectively foster community and third-party involvement, but we also
> > continue to see GPL as a top choice to similarly build community.
>
> > While the debate about community versus commercial benefit may not
> > necessarily be prompting movement away from GPL, I believe another
> > recent action may indeed do so. The latest series of GPL lawsuits are
> > aimed at raising awareness, profile and legitimacy for open source
> > software. While those bringing the suits — primarily the Software
> > Freedom Law Center — have exhibited a reasonable approach and settled
> > with past lawsuit targets, these suits and publicity may still serve to
> > steer organizations making the choice to other licenses, including the
> > LGPL, BSD, Apache and the Eclipse Public License.
>
> > Another factor is the GPL thumping that took place during the SaveMySQL
> > campaign as the European Commission contemplated Oracle’s proposed (and
> > now closed) acquisition of Sun Microsystems and the open source MySQL. I
> > voiced my concern that the SaveMySQL campaign might jeopardize or
> > de-value open source software projects and pieces in M&A, but I believe
> > I’m actually in agreement with SaveMySQL leader Monty Widenius that the
> > deal and process may end up tarnishing the GPL and its reputation in the
> > enterprise.
>
> > As stated above, much of the movement we’re seeing away from the GPL has
> > to do with the desire and opportunity to place open source software
> > alongside, within, on top of or otherwise with proprietary software.
> > Non-GPL open source licenses are also more flexible in terms of
> > integrating and bundling with other open source software licensed under
> > other, non-GPL licenses.
>
> > We anticipated this fade of GPL as covered in our report, The Myth of
> > Open Source License Proliferation. Given its clout, durability and
> > continued popularity in commercial open source (and with help from
> > continued growth of GPL-licensed Linux) we believe the GPL will endure
> > as a top open source license. However, given their flexibility and the
> > ability to combine with other code, we see a number of other challengers
> > — Apache, BSD, EPL and LGPL — rising while GPL dominance wanes. We’re
> > also watching to see whether the AGPLv3 for networked software will
> > provide new life for GPL-style licensing and community building in
> > emerging virtualized, SaaS and cloud computing environments. --

> > regards,
>

Re: As the GPL fades

[David Kastrup]

Alan Mackenzie  writes:

> In gnu.misc.discuss Alexander Terekhov  wrote:
>> http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/
>
>> ------
>> As the GPL fades
>
>> Jay Lyman, January 28, 2010 @ 3:17 pm ET
>
>> We're continuing to see signs that the dominant GPL open source license
>> may be fading from favor among commercial open source software
>> players...
>
> Alexander, who pays you to post in this forum, and how much?

Oh please.  Who would pay for that kind of nonsense?  Can't you imagine
that it's a work of hate for him?  Worthless all on its own?

-- 
David Kastrup
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Alan Mackenzie]

In gnu.misc.discuss Alexander Terekhov  wrote:
> http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/

> ------
> As the GPL fades

> Jay Lyman, January 28, 2010 @ 3:17 pm ET

> We're continuing to see signs that the dominant GPL open source license
> may be fading from favor among commercial open source software
> players...

Alexander, who pays you to post in this forum, and how much?

> regards,
> alexander.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov  writes:

> http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/
>
> ------
> As the GPL fades
>
> Jay Lyman, January 28, 2010 @ 3:17 pm ET
>  
> We’re continuing to see signs that the dominant GPL open source license
> may be fading from favor among commercial open source software players.

Freshmeat:

Licenses

  GPL (20985)
  LGPL (3245)
  BSD Revised (1477)
  GPLv3 (1422)
  BSD Original (1405)
  GPLv2 (1363)
  Freeware (1262)
  MIT/X (1009)
  Apache 2.0 (637)
  Public Domain (605)
  Artistic (565)
  Other (496)
[...]

That's not exactly "fading" in my book.

-- 
David Kastrup
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Alexander Terekhov]

Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
> 
> Rubbish.  People have been predicting the death of the GPL for 20 years, and
> in 20 years time they'll still be predictig its death.

Hey Ciaran, any chance that "FreeBooteR" is your nick at
the451group.com?

http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/

"Comment by FreeBooteR, January 28, 2010 7:18 pm 

Hate freedom much? The GPL is strong and growing and will always be
there to free people from the tyranny of proprietary licencing.

Reply to this comment 

 Comment by Jay Lyman, January 28, 2010 10:49 pm 

Consider reality much? As stated in the post, GPL is strong and will
endure as a top open source license, but it won’t be number one for
long. Those other licenses, BTW, are ironically and accurately known as
‘permissive,’ while the ‘tyranny’-busting GPL is widely and accurately
known as ‘restrictive.’

JL

...

There are a few examples of movement away from GPL. And where exactly
did we mention anything about ‘doomed to oblivion.’ If I can quote
myself
‘Given its clout, durability and continued popularity in commercial open
source (and with help from continued growth of GPL-licensed Linux) we
believe the GPL will endure as a top open source license.’
Sooo sensationalist ...

JL

...

‘As the GPL fades ...’ seems like a fairly accurate description of how I
believe the GPL is fading. It’s not doomed. It’s not going away. But it
is fading from its prominence as the top open source license. I don’t
necessarily agree the GPL suits should drive anyone away from GPL and I
think they do more to raise awareness and credibility for open source,
but the effect will undoubtedly be to spur some to avoid the perceived
trouble.

JL"

regards,
alexander.

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: As the GPL fades

[Ciaran O'Riordan]

Rubbish.  People have been predicting the death of the GPL for 20 years, and
in 20 years time they'll still be predictig its death.

-- 
Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 487 64 17 54, http://ciaran.compsoc.com

Please help build the software patents wiki: http://en.swpat.org

   http://www.EndSoftwarePatents.org

Donate: http://endsoftwarepatents.org/donate
List: http://campaigns.fsf.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/esp-action-alert


___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

As the GPL fades

[Alexander Terekhov]

http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/01/28/as-the-gpl-fades/

--
As the GPL fades

Jay Lyman, January 28, 2010 @ 3:17 pm ET
 
We’re continuing to see signs that the dominant GPL open source license
may be fading from favor among commercial open source software players.
The latest move away from the GPL comes from content management software
vendor Alfresco, which is moving to the LGPL after originally releasing
its code under the GPL three years ago. The reasoning for the shift,
according to Alfresco CEO John Newton, is the company sees greater
opportunity beyond being a software application, particularly given the
emergence of the Content Management Interoperability Services standard.
Alfresco won mostly praise for its move, and it does make sense given
where open source is going these days. 

I believe the emerging trend away from GPL and toward more permissive,
mixable licenses such as LGPL or Apache reflects the broadening out of
open source software not only throughout the enterprise IT software
stack, but also throughout uses beyond individual applications,
frameworks and systems. More and more open source software vendors are
pursuing opportunities in embedded use or OEM deals whereby open source
software often must sit alongside or even inside of proprietary code and
products. Similar to what we’ve seen in the mobile space — where open
source software and development are more prominent than ever, but end
products with accessible code are not — open source is broadening out,
but it is doing so in many cases by integrating with proprietary code.

We also see some debate about the community and commercial ups and downs
of GPL as organizations contemplate the balance of the two and the best
way to achieve commercial success with open source software. As Matt
highlights, we are seeing a choice of non-GPL licensing in order to more
effectively foster community and third-party involvement, but we also
continue to see GPL as a top choice to similarly build community.

While the debate about community versus commercial benefit may not
necessarily be prompting movement away from GPL, I believe another
recent action may indeed do so. The latest series of GPL lawsuits are
aimed at raising awareness, profile and legitimacy for open source
software. While those bringing the suits — primarily the Software
Freedom Law Center — have exhibited a reasonable approach and settled
with past lawsuit targets, these suits and publicity may still serve to
steer organizations making the choice to other licenses, including the
LGPL, BSD, Apache and the Eclipse Public License.

Another factor is the GPL thumping that took place during the SaveMySQL
campaign as the European Commission contemplated Oracle’s proposed (and
now closed) acquisition of Sun Microsystems and the open source MySQL. I
voiced my concern that the SaveMySQL campaign might jeopardize or
de-value open source software projects and pieces in M&A, but I believe
I’m actually in agreement with SaveMySQL leader Monty Widenius that the
deal and process may end up tarnishing the GPL and its reputation in the
enterprise. 

As stated above, much of the movement we’re seeing away from the GPL has
to do with the desire and opportunity to place open source software
alongside, within, on top of or otherwise with proprietary software.
Non-GPL open source licenses are also more flexible in terms of
integrating and bundling with other open source software licensed under
other, non-GPL licenses.

We anticipated this fade of GPL as covered in our report, The Myth of
Open Source License Proliferation. Given its clout, durability and
continued popularity in commercial open source (and with help from
continued growth of GPL-licensed Linux) we believe the GPL will endure
as a top open source license. However, given their flexibility and the
ability to combine with other code, we see a number of other challengers
— Apache, BSD, EPL and LGPL — rising while GPL dominance wanes. We’re
also watching to see whether the AGPLv3 for networked software will
provide new life for GPL-style licensing and community building in
emerging virtualized, SaaS and cloud computing environments.
--

regards,
alexander.

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss