Re: How do Free software developers get money?

mike3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is the software they then develop for those companies Free software, > however? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-

4 OOXML links: "Deprecated before use", BRM access, patents, pic

With ISO's Ballot Resolution Meeting taking place Feb 25th-29th, discussion of the OOXML format and the ISO process is heating up again. Here are four documents that were published today (or at least I found them today): DIS-29500: Deprecated before use? by Georg Greve http://fsfeurope.org/docu

Document Freedom Day: March 26th ok for list? Yes or no

Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is there any particular reason for all that FUD here, rather than in a > group where it would be on topic? Sorry about all that FUD. So, would it be okay for me to announce Docment Freedom Day here? So that you can evaluate it and give me a yes or no ans

Re: How to make the patent system fairer

Moshe Goldfarb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > You are an idiot Mark Kent. @everyone: please ignore the trolls. -- Ciarán O'Riordan (+32 477 36 44 19) \ Support Free Software and GNU/Linux http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ _ \ Join FSFE's Fellowship: http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/weblog \

Re: Free software, free speech, human dignity

Andreas Röhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > we should not risk being injailed for our publishings So, authors should have no responsibilities and all laws of libel, slander, perjury, etc. should be deleted? Also, it seems your point is that copyright law is unethical, not specifically the GPL.

Re: Free software, free speech, human dignity

Andreas Röhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Make the check against reality: What with the high > ranking persons committing all this while making false > claims against Iraq? And where are your examples of people in jail for violating the GPL? -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 477 36 44 19, http://cia

Re: Free software, free speech, human dignity

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Do you have a > car/house/children, Ciaran? One thing I have is privacy, so I won't answer your questions about my personal life. But thanks for your interest. About philosophy, yes, I back RMS's philosophy about living cheaply, even if I don't i

Re: Free software, free speech, human dignity

I'm not sure I follow the logic of this thread, but since grey areas and Nelson Mandela both got mentioned, you might like this blog entry about Mandela being taken of the USA's list of terrorists: http://blogs.sun.com/paulj/entry/when_is_a_sunni_fundamentalist -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 477 36

Re: beginner participant of OpenSource project

That question is a bit too vague. I suggest you look at what software you use and like, think about a simple change that would make it better for you, and try to implement that. If you discover it is too hard, try something else. As a side note, although they're practically the same set of soft

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: GPL version 4]

Hi Fred, The linking restrictions in the GPL are there to prevent people from using GPL'd software as the basis for a larger, non-free software package. If this situation was not blocked, free software would be simultaneously contributing to (without benefiting from) and competing against non-fr

Re: LGPL vs. GPL

Encouraging contributions isn't usually a motivation to switch to LGPL. The writers of proprietary software will generally keep the most useful functionality in their application code (rather than in your library) and will contribute as little as possible. A permissive licence (such as the LGPL)

softwarecombinations paper Re: LGPL vs. GPL

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Now read > > http://www.usfca.edu/law/determann/softwarecombinations060403.pdf I just skimmed it. I didn't find what the author is trying to prove, but I know that most of your mails about the GPL are claims that it isn't enforceable or doesn't

Re: Circumventing the GPL

rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [...]the license is preempted by 17 USC sec 301.[...] And since invalidating the GPL would be worth billions to some companies, how do you explain that your discovery (and that of Alexander Terekhov) are ignored by everyone in a position to act? -- Ciarán O'R

Re: Circumventing the GPL

rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I see you have [...] What I've done is I've applied Richard Feynman's simple rule about theories: if it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. You proposed a controversial, completely unproven idea of copyright law that would have certain consequences. I poin

Re: Circumventing the GPL

Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What is "controversial" or unproven about 17 USC sec. 301 of the > Copyright Act? Exactly. It exists, and no one in a position to act is claiming that it makes the GPL invalid or not work like FSF claims it works. If that law impacted the GPL, there would be

About first sale doctrine

I can't follow all the mails on this list, but just to distill the discussion down: Is someone on this list claiming after Company X sells a source+binary copy of some GPL'd software to Buyer Y, that, in the USA, Buyer Y can then pass on or resell the binary (without the source) without being boun

Re: [Fwd: Request to mailing list Advocate rejected]

Jeff Shippen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What does this list have to do with Advocate Play Ogg list? I don't know the official relationship, but I suppose a common factor is that you should find people here who are interested/experienced in advocating free file formats. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +

Re: LGPL vs. GPL

Hi John, These cases are never black and white, and I don't know PocketCAS or MimeTex, so I can't give any advice on this situation, but here are some general ramblings anyway... If PocketCAS is written to specifically work with MimeTex, then PocketCAS might be a "derived work" which would mean

softwarecombinations paper again Re: LGPL vs. GPL

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > http://www.usfca.edu/law/determann/softwarecombinations060403.pdf ...and still none of the trolls can say why this paper is ignored by companies who could gain millions if they could invalidate the GPL. Even being able to make a credible insinuat

Re: softwarecombinations paper again Re: LGPL vs. GPL

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Companies are ignoring the > GPL left and right altogether. None of them are using that paper to claim that their actions are ok, so this new point doesn't prove your old point. The current level of violations is only overwhelming the GPL enforcer

Re: softwarecombinations paper again Re: LGPL vs. GPL

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Read the paper, [...] I did. It's drivel. Next. [Well, I skimmed it, but it was quickly obvious that a skim is all it deserved.] -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 477 36 44 19, http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ Support free software, join FSFE's Fellowship:

Re: GPLv3 question regarding server applications

Hi Bruce, Below are my thoughts, but I can't be sure I've understood the situation, and I'm no lawyer anyway. "Bruce C. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Say you take a project that is a server application, which is released > under the GPLv3, make some modifications to it and then make it >

Re: softwarecombinations paper again Re: LGPL vs. GPL

Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> [Well, I skimmed it, but it was quickly obvious that a skim is all it >> deserved.] > > Can you give any specific criticism? The meritlessness of that paper, at least insofar as it could create problems for GPL enforcers, has been proven by the zero react

Re: LGPL vs. GPL

David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes, this is a political question and a moral one. It is, but people approach the ethical questions of labour and software from different starting points. Most people have thought about and discussed the ethical aspects of child labour, and try to some

Re: LGPL vs. GPL

JohnF <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "let the best program win." If the commercial application is > truly better, maybe its superior functional specifications will > inspire an open source "knock off." It might, but it's predictable that the developer of the proprietary application will try to ma

Re: LGPL vs. GPL

JohnF <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I thought I'd already acknowledged that class of problems in a > preceding post in this thread (quoting myself) ... > "Of course, I do condemn big companies, like, sometimes, MicroSoft, >when they try to dominate the market by choking competition rather >

Re: LGPL vs. GPL

JohnF <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well, software doesn't have to be free to protect users from > these kinds of problems, just open -- or visible -- source. Well, if the source is visible, people can examine it and see where the problem is, but I think people should also be allowed fix problems

Re: Why GnuZilla?

John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Alfred M. Szmidt writes: >> It is better to use something like gNewSense, which is 100% free >> software. > > But includes non-free documentation. The GFDL is pretty good. I wish is would be changed in certain ways, but I don't see any reason not to read

Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?

Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It is interesting to note that compiling the source code of standard > program packages of independently authored c code (and assembler) like > the Linux kernel does not create a derivative work. Correct, or more precisely, does not *necessarily* create a deriv

Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?

Ciaran O'Riordan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > For example, if you sang a song, recorded it, and put it into the Linux > kernel source as your start-up sound, then that wouldn't automatically be > GPL'd, AFAICT. That would be a simple amalgamation, even if the fina

Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?

> No, it would not. By statute, in the U.S., a derivative work is a That's not about software, and that's only one jurisdiction. > Programs written to interoperate with other programs are not derivative > works of those programs. True, but we're not talking about that. The example you're reply

Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?

If your scheduler was truly generic and could (even just theoretically) be plugged into many kernels, then you might be free from copyright obligations. But being serious, writing a generic scheduler isn't practical. That would be like writing a generic "chapter 8" that can replace chapter 8 of

Re: FOSS and universities

Ricardo Gabriel Herdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > discussion to something bigger, what about a GNU-campaign? A project was started before: http://www.gnu.org/education/ I don't know if it's still active, but that page might contain some useful links or names anyway. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32

Re: Which OS You Are Using?

Debian (without non-free, except that I do install the GFDL'd manuals which are wrongly placed in non-free). I'm planning to switch to gNewSense in the short/mid-term. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 477 36 44 19, http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ Support free software, join FSFE's Fellowship: http://fsfe.o

Re: Which OS You Are Using?

Ciaran O'Riordan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Debian (without non-free, except that I do install the GFDL'd manuals which > are wrongly placed in non-free). And I disabled my wifi card because it uses a binary blob. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 477 36 44 19, http://c

Re: Revisionist Open Source

Rjack writes: > The conceptual underpinnings of "open source" and its benefits > predated ESR They can't. "open source" is just a marketing campaign for free software. You could argue that the concept of "free software" existed before RMS or GNU. That seems to be what you are arguing. There,

Re: Revisionist Open Source

Rjack writes: > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_Stallman_Belfort.jpg And if he had no sense of humour, you'd complain about that instead. Here's the text version: http://fsfeurope.org/documents/rms-fs-2006-03-09.en.html#st-ignucias-and-the-church-of-emacs -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +

Re: Matt Assay Tells the Truth

All offtopic. The genius of RMS is that he wrote a social contract (GPL) that allows socialists and capitalists and all the rest to contribute to something without having to agree about politics. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 487 64 17 54, http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ End Software Patents: http://www

Re: Using proprietary graphics in a free program

Tord, this list has lots of trolls. It's best to ignore them. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 487 64 17 54, http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ End Software Patents: http://www.EndSoftwarePatents.org/ ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org htt

Re: Matt Assay Tells the Truth

Alexander Terekhov : > Where does your DONATION to the GNU [...] end up? Your donation ends up in the GNU project. GNU doesn't pay SFLC's lawyers. SFLC has it's own funding. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 487 64 17 54, http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ End Software Patents: http://www.EndSoftwarePatent

Re: Zonker on Open Source licenses ..

Doug Mentohl writes: > you may need to distribute the entire thing -- not just the original GPL never forces you to distribute what you wrote. Distribution, or not, is a choice. But if you choose to distribute, then you have to comply with the conditions in the licence, such as making source c

Re: Cisco v FSF dismissed

>>> The Cisco v. Free Software case was dismissed with prejudice and >>> without award of court costs. (On PACER court record 4/22/2009) I don't see this on the pacer site. Anyone got a direct link? There's no mention of this on any news site. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 487 64 17 54, http://ci

Re: Cisco v FSF dismissed

Alexander Terekhov writes: > Ciaran O'Riordan wrote: >> >> >>> The Cisco v. Free Software case was dismissed with prejudice and >> >>> without award of court costs. (On PACER court record 4/22/2009) >> >> I don't see

Fw: [FSF] FSF Settles Suit Against Cisco

Well, here's the answer. [This press release is available on the web at . FSF Compliance Engineer Brett Smith has written about what we can learn from this settlement at .]

Re: Fw: [FSF] FSF Settles Suit Against Cisco

FSF aims for compliance. Here they got that, plus cash, plus assurances for the future. Win. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 487 64 17 54, http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ Software patents wiki: http://en.swpat.org/ End Software Patents: http://www.EndSoftwarePatents.org/ Donate: http://endsoftwarepate

Re: Fw: [FSF] FSF Settles Suit Against Cisco

Rjack writes: > The case was dismissed WITH PREJUDICE against the FSF. Wait a minute. Did the court dismiss it IN ALL CAPS Well that changes things. But seriously, "with prejudice" is a legal term with whatever range of meanings in the USA. I don't know all the range of meanings, and most

Re: [News] FSF Celebrates a Win in Cisco Case

Alexander Terekhov writes: > LOL > > http://opensource.ulitzer.com/node/974408 I'm glad you can laugh at an article that says Rjack and you called it wrong and everyone else is right. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 487 64 17 54, http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ Software patents wiki: http://en.swpat.org/

Re: question gdbserver

Hi, This list probably doesn't have people who can answer that question. There are good GDB lists here: http://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/mailing-lists/ -- Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 487 64 17 54, http://ciaran.compsoc.com Please help build the software patents wiki: http://en.swpat.org

Using the GPL for music

Tim Smith writes: > The FSF says the GPL is for code. ...and other things. They use it for graphics: http://www.gnu.org/graphics/meditate.html And I think Richard has said the GPL is a fine licence for documentation. They also say: The GNU GPL can be used for general data which is not

Re: As the GPL fades

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.EndSof

Information on GPLv3

Myself and others in FSFE have made transcripts of five of Stallman's GPLv3 talks, two of Moglen's, and one of an excerpt where Alan Cox talks about GPLv3. They're all here: http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3/#transcripts The freshest of these is from the 4th international conference in In

Re: Interview Richard Stallman about Microsoft, Bush and Human Rights

"Misterblack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > http://isohunt.com/download/13661299/richard+stallman When I got to that page, I get a torrent file: [isoHunt] Richard Stallman Genova Interview for italian edition Linux Journal Luigi Corrias [EMAIL PROTECTED] cow.torrent And when I try to download

Re: GNU/Linux Super Promotion on VISTA release day.

I think that doing some PR work for the day that Vista is launched is a great idea. > Have a penguin fest at Lake Washington with a model show. A gnu costume would be better: http://www.fsfe.org/en/fellows/lix/my_new_gnu_costume Highlighting the Linux kernel mascot is entrenching the mistake th

Re: GNU/Linux Super Promotion on VISTA release day.

"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >If we are to hand out CDs, we should hand out ones that have only >free software. I know of two fully free GNU/Linus distros: > >http://www.gnewsense.org/ >http://www.ututo.org/ > > There are more, Dynebolic, BLAG, GNUStep, and Mu

Re: Any estimates of illegal use of GPL / LGPL software ?

Any copyright violations are investigated and stopped. If you think you know of a violation of GNU project copyrights, see this page: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html -- Ciarán O'Riordan __ \ http://fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3 http://ciaran.compsoc.com/

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Bruce Perens and world table

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > http://floatingpoint.wordpress.com/2006/10/16/off-the-record/#comments > > -- > Dan Lyons // Oct 17th 2006 at 7:52 am > > Translation: Nothing to worry about here, folks. Just move along, Dan is replying there to a comment I posted. Dan's

Linux: GPLv3, DRM, and Exceptions

Here's something I wrote about GPLv3 and Devices Rigged to Malfunction: http://kerneltrap.org/node/7238 -- Ciarán O'Riordan __ \ http://fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3 http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ _ \ GPLv3 and other work supported by http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/weblog \

Re: Linux: GPLv3, DRM, and Exceptions

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hey FSFE retard, it's malfunction in your brain, not Tivo-like devices. Wow. I'll chalk that down as a win. If the content of the essay left even you with nothing to complain about, I must have hit the mark. -- Ciarán O'Riordan ___

Re: The GPL is toast in Hamburg (was: German-GPL victorious in Frankfurt district court)

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > http://www.usedsoft.com/pdf/presseinfo/usedSoft_PM_Urteil_LG_Hamburg_Final.pdf Can you explain your email in English? (Or, for a private conversation with one person, email that person offlist) -- Ciarán O'Riordan __ \ http://fsf

Re: The GPL is toast in Hamburg (was: German-GPL victorious inFrankfurt district court)

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Can you explain your email in English? > > That pdf is not an email. Or what do you mean? Your email made no sense to me. I guess that's because half of it email was in German and I can't read German. (I just quoted the URL to provide a refere

Re: The GPL is toast in Hamburg (was: German-GPL victorious in Frankfurt district court)

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'll try. But slowly, okay? Nope, still don't know what the point of your email was. -- Ciarán O'Riordan __ \ http://fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3 http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ _ \ GPLv3 and other work supported by http:/

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- RMS's insanity exposed

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > http://mirror.linuxquestions.org/pub/archive/tllts/tllts_165-11-01-06.mp3 Thanks for the link. I've made a transcript of the part where he talks about if Java was freed: http://www.fsfe.org/en/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/rms_recent

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- RMS's insanity exposed

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > How much do you want for a transcript of the whole thing? Do you accept > PayPal? Unfortunately, due to schedule constraints, I can't even think about taking on a task that size right now. I am, however, considering making a transcript of another,

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- RMS's insanity exposed

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > http://mirror.linuxquestions.org/pub/archive/tllts/tllts_165-11-01-06.mp3 > > (The part about programmers making money is priceless. Minute 65 or so.) In this talk 3 days after that interview: http://dylanknightrogers.com/rms-speech-iit-11042006.o

Transcripts of GPLv3 event, please help to spread

Having recorded parts of last week's GPLv3 conference, I've gotten two transcripts made and put online: Richard's talk: http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3/tokyo-rms-transcript My talk: http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3/tokyo-ciaran-transcript If anyone wants to help raise community a

Re: Transcripts of GPLv3 event, please help to spread

> Any videos? Not right now, hopefully in the future. -- Ciarán O'Riordan __ \ http://fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3 http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ _ \ GPLv3 and other work supported by http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/weblog \ Fellowship: http://www.fsfe.org __

Re: Strawmen and Urban Legends

An informative read is "The Dangers of Software Patents": http://www.ifso.ie/documents/rms-2004-05-24.html Patents on curing rubber can be fine, even if the patented idea mentions software. The problem is when a patent covers a software idea that *could* be used for curing rubber, but which coul

Re: Strawmen and Urban Legends

Fixing the patent system is made more difficult by the structure of patent offices. By being paid for each application that they approve, they are economically dependent on approving a certain number per year. Even if the patent office decided that it was being too broad in scope or too low in i

Re: Strawmen and Urban Legends

"Regis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Search for "computer implemented invention" I've fallen asleep on the floor of the European Parliament thinking about this. No searching required :-) Here's some post-directive notes I made: http://ciaran.compsoc.com/software-patents.html -- Ciarán O'Rio

An explanation of tivoisation

This isn't a ground-breaking article, but there didn't seem to be any articles that described tivoisation in moderate detail, so I wrote one: Tivoisation explained - implementation and harms http://fsfe.org/en/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/tivoisation_explained_implementation_and_ha

Re: An explanation of tivoisation

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "Tivoisation is a technique that manufacturers use to produce a > computer, to sell to you, whose software they can update but you > can't." > > That's exactly how my BMW works! The freedom to change the software on your BMW is not as important

Re: GPL version 3 comments

"penguin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > How would an exeptions file be treated in court? The GPL needs to fit > every program, and what if someone doesn't see the exeptions file? For exceptions, this is not a problem because anyone can use the software under the normal GPL. But for additional r

Transcript of RMS's general free software speech

Something new to argue about: http://fsfeurope.org/documents/rms-fs-2006-03-09.en.html It's a transript of a talk Stallman gave on March 3rd 2006 in Croatia where he talks about free software, why it's defined the way it is, how the GNU project started, why it started the way it did, what problem

Re: Transcript of RMS's general free software speech

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hey Ciaran, do you really take that [...] seriously? Very seriously. No one asked me to make that, but I knew people would find it useful, so I made it - and a lot of people have said thanks. There are many more here: http://ciaran.compsoc.com/t

2 articles on GPLv3: EUCD/DMCA, and removable permissions

To get thinking about GPLv3 again, I put two articles online in the last few days, and am working on a handful of others. How GPLv3 addresses the EUCD and DMCA http://fsfe.org/en/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/how_gplv3_addresses_the_eucd_and_dmca Why GPLv3 says additional permissio

Re: GPL: Does a conveyor's violation result in rights to users?

"Elvey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > E.g. Assume a user receives a binary-only copy of the firmware bundled > with a hardware device based on a GPL'd OS (no source or offer of > source is provided). This is a copyright violation. > Does the GPL give the user the right [...] to provide or obtain

Re: GPL: Does a conveyor's violation result in rights to users?

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As if "first sale" ("copyright exhaustion" in EU > speak) were nonexistent Well, I don't know the answer to that, and I'm not going to check with a lawyer right now, but if there was such a loophole in the GPL, wouldn't someone have exploited it b

Re: GPL's anti-patent stance misses the true opportunity

"quanta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > While there is no doubt that software patent does stifle innovation, Maximising innovation is not the goal of the GPL. > Remember the U.S. Patent No. 5,995,745? For those who don't know what > it is, it is the patent granted to Finite State Machine Labs In

Transcript of RMS on GPLv3, and a new LGPL draft

A transcript of RMS's GPLv3 talk from Sunday: http://fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3/brussels-rms-transcript Please pass this on to any list or forum where people might be interested. Topics include: 1. What is Free Software? 2. The GNU project 3. Free Software licences 4. International

just another freeware blog (was: Re: Great Free Software Blog)

"Koh Choon Lin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think the title is misleading: "Paying for good software" will lead > others to think that free means free of charge. That blog does mean free of charge. It's a freeware blog, not a free software blog. -- Ciarán O'Riordan __ \ ht

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Herr Professor: "giving away coupons activity by Microsoft is meaningless and useless"

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "They're not distributing Linux," Wilder said. "They're providing > somebody access to a service but they're not providing copies of Linux > on a disk, and they're not providing somebody access to Linux for the > purpose of download, and so they're

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Herr Professor: "giving away couponsactivity by Microsoft is meaningless and useless"

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Given that MS vouchers don't contain any code whatsoever, what does > it have to do with copyright to begin with? Copyright law prohibits a lot more than copying. You're not that naive. -- Ciarán O'Riordan __ \ http://fsfeurope.

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linspire: "GPLv3 - Unforseen Consequences?"

> We have customers who have switched from Linspire to Novell because > Novell offers patent protection with Microsoft. GPLv3 will prevent what Novell did, so no more customers will leave Linspire for this reason. ...although users may still leave Linspire for other reasons, such as spreading FU

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- InformationWeek: "Microsoft Strikes Linux Patent Deal With LG Electronics"

MS are trying to chalk down as many of these deals before GPLv3 comes into circulation because they know that people will stop being interested at that point. If MS were really confident in their patent portfolio, they wouldn't have to hand over so much money in each deal, as mentioned here: http

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Eben: "Lawyers licensed to practice in any country are invited"

> SFLC is looking for cheap labor ... > That's how it reads to me. Well, don't sign up then. Sheesh. -- Ciarán O'Riordan __ \ http://fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3 http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ _ \ GPLv3 and other work supported by http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/weblog \

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Williams: "it's time to drop the GPL"

> > FSF is so caught up in their own agenda that they're > > forgetting the whole point - the freedom of choice. Who's whole point? They're so caught up in the whole point of the freedoms they value (being able to help yourself, and each person being able to cooperate with each other is the poin

glibc and the Linux libc fork

For anyone who'd like to read about the "Linux libc" fork in the mid-90s, or for anyone who hasn't heard this story, I've put together all the info I could find here: http://fsfe.org/en/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/history_of_glibc_and_linux_libc -- Ciarán O'Riordan _

Re: glibc and the Linux libc fork

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > http://www.cygwin.com/ml/libc-announce/2001/msg0.html In response to a writing about a 1994-1997/8 event, you're pointing out an August 2001 event that lead to nothing? You're slipping, Alexander. -- Ciarán O'Riordan __ \ ht

Re: glibc and the Linux libc fork

FSF worked on various features, including but not limited to, Hurd support. Drepper's only accusation is that FSF didn't work on Linux-kernel specific stuff - as if they had an obligation to do so. FSF may even have realised that others would do this work, and so it was more right for them to fo

Re: Gnash Question...

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Can i create webpages using Gnash in a similar way? No. Gnash only plays flash movies. It doesn't make them. If you do make Flash movies, please test them to ensure they work fine with Gnash. This will mean people will not have to install non-free software to view

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- IT Business Edge: "Rosen: GPL Is Good, but OSL Is Better"

> Rosen: GPL Is Good, but OSL Is Better GPLv3 isn't Stallman's ideal licence either. He would prefer that the tivoisation and patent clauses be stronger, but as well as writing a licence that is better than GPLv2, Stallman is writing a licence that people will use. If nobody uses a licence, t

Re: Gnash Question...

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > When i use a browser that doesn't have a Flash facility to open a page > with a flash application on it, it downloads flash for free and > installs it there and then, no? That's "free" in the "no cost" sense, but it's not free in the "unfettered" sense. You're prevent

Re: How does GPL3 stack up against KHTML/Safari exploitation?

quanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > How does GPL3 licence prevent such kind of abuse Extra requirements could have been added to fix that problem, but it's a rare problem, and Apple's exploitation the GPL in this way proved unsustainable. So I'm not sure this problem merited adding any new requ

About the InformationWeek GPLv3 article

I wrote a piece about InformationWeek's recent GPLv3 article: "Misleading InformationWeek GPLv3 article" http://www.fsfe.org/en/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/misleading_informationweek_gplv3_article It's been posted to digg: http://digg.com/linux_unix/InformationWeek_fabricates_GPLv

EU anti-trust case, FSFE, Samba

Anyone who's interested in what the EU's ruling against MS means for free software can find an interview here with FSFE and Samba: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070919214307459 (text and ogg) It can be voted on at digg: http://digg.com/microsoft/Want_to_meet_four_men_who_dared_to_fig

Re: EU anti-trust case, FSFE, Samba

Byung-Hee HWANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > anyone to explain about the information's meaning? Microsoft has a dominant position in the desktop operating systems market. In the EU, dominant positions are legal, but you are not allowed to use a dominant position in one market to influence anothe

Re: EU anti-trust case, FSFE, Samba

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 478FSFE asserts that Linux products do not exert a competitive > threat on the work group server operating systems market. Yes. Free software wasn't (and isn't) a threat to MS's market share in file/printer sharing between clients and servers.

Re: EU anti-trust case, FSFE, Samba

Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > reasonable and non-discriminatory != royalty free, to begin with. It does when they have to not discriminate against Samba. ...but I do have to make one clarification. If Microsoft wanted a once-off payment for access to the specs, that could be

RMS transcript for all the GNU fans

A 30-minute speech, good for non-tech audiences: http://fsfe.org/en/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/transcript_richard_stallman_honary_degree_speech_pavia_2007 -- Ciarán O'Riordan __ \ Support Free Software and GNU/Linux http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ _ \ Joi

Re: Gnash Considered Non-Free by Gobuntu?

DC Parris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is he assuming patent infringement? I don't know what he's assuming :) > Is it a good idea to > consider 'possible' or 'allegedly' infringing code to be 'non-Free' without > some sort of proof positive? No. > I find the Mono submission to be slightly le

  1   2   >