[linux-elitists] Re: GPL Violations [was Re: Mobile Phone Choices]
Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz
Fri Jul 28 10:27:20 PDT 2006
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 09:08:17PM +0300, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> One advantage to BSD-style licence is that when the copyright holder changes,
> you are still not held ransom. See what happened with BDB and InnoDB in MySQL
> after Oracle bought both for example.[Oracle]
I really fail to see how the copyright holder's going propietary
woluld hold me any more ransom if previous releases were GPL than if
they were BSD. I'd still have the last free release to work from and
none of the later ones to incorporate.
> [ story about BSA's bullying ]
> So I don't think we should treat companies like this either. And from my
> understanding, that's what gpl-violations.org is trying to do.
Uh. gpl-violations.org has not (generally, AFAIK) disclosed who it
fights with. The case that it's getting to court appears to be one
where *after negotiation* the infinging side is being obnoxious. It
even sounds like it acknowdleges infringing but then goes on to say
it's not infinging anyways.
And we don't know who it is, so, whose reputation's is being damaged?
> I realise the MS EULA is much more complex than the GPL (and in most regards,
> more restrictive.)
Could you, like, enlighten me and tell me *one* thing *any* non-free non-source
EULA allows me to do that a free one does not?
> ... SleepyCat
> licence, which is GPL-like, but simpler (allows proprietary sourceware to
> link against it.).
I don't follow this. Why is 'has fewer restrictions' an argument
towards 'is simpler'.
GPG-Fingerprint: 7C81 E60C 442E 8FBC D975 2F49 0199 8318 ADC9 BC28
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://allium.zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20060728/0a8eacaa/attachment.pgp
More information about the linux-elitists