[linux-elitists] Reformism versus radicalism and UCITA (was: Re: [linux-elitists] death knell for shrinkwrap...)

Jay Sulzberger jays@panix.com
Thu Feb 17 16:44:18 PST 2000


On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Seth David Schoen wrote:

> Seth David Schoen writes:
> 
> > Heather writes:
> > 
> > > Jim Dennis predicted that UCITA (if passed and actually attempted to be
> > > enforced) would be the death knell of commercial software... 
> > > 
> > >   * because -some- businesses can't afford risky things like agreeing
> > >     to b.s. written on page 23 of a 25 page document of which only
> > >     12 lines are shown to you at a time with an OK button.  (So far, 
> > >     they've been relying on the clause waaaay near the bottom that says
> > >     um, and if this is illegal in your state, whatever that was we didn't
> > >     say it, but the rest is in full force.)
> > > 
> > >   * because if we can't reverse engineer to make interoperable, why 
> > >     then, we'll just stop buying the one we can't modify.
> 
> Richard Stallman gave his view of these and related arguments at
> 
> http://linuxtoday.com/stories/15948.html
> 
> He suggests that proprietary software vendors will not use UCITA in a way
> which would provoke a severe backlash, because they are "greedy and ruthless,
> but they are not stupid".
> 
> -- 
> Seth David Schoen <schoen@loyalty.org>  | And do not say, I will study when I
> Temp.  http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/  | have leisure; for perhaps you will
> down:  http://www.loyalty.org/   (CAF)  | not have leisure.  -- Pirke Avot 2:5

They are very stupid.  Bill Gates could have bought FreeBSD, two LispOSes,
QNX, revived MULTICS, then ported O9* and we'd have had a much harder time
than we've had so far.

I have not yet read rms's piece.

oo--JS.





More information about the linux-elitists mailing list