Re: FC4 or FC5

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 14:53:20 -0500
Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Not at all.  The proprietary component is available to anyone
> willing to meet its license requirments.  If it is a commercial
> product, it is in the supplier's interest to make the terms
> attractive.  If they aren't acceptable, there won't be any
> buyers.  So let's assume the end users are happy with that
> part.

But that's _exactly_ the same for the GPL.  It's available to
anyone willing to meet its license requirements.
 
> The original GPL'd part is not in question.  Everyone is
> allowed to get their own copy of that.  What I'm saying is
> that I cannot add work to that part and share my work
> with others if that work also involves different components.
> No one would be stealing anything.

Just try to modify and distribute any proprietary software and
see if you end up in court or not.  You're demanding something
of GPL software that you're not demanding of proprietary software.
That's just silly.

> What problems?  No one is forced to buy it or meet its
> license terms.  They have the choice to do so or not.
> And there is no restriction against using the free software
> with it if everyone performs their own work to combine
> them. The restriction is that you can't share that
> work.

No one is forced to use GPL software.  They have the choice to do
so or not.  Have you ever read the restrictions you agree to when
you accept a proprietary software license?   The number of restrictions
on you is so far beyond the modest GPL restrictions it's not even
funny.
 
> You are missing the point.  You can't do this because the
> GPL explicitly removes that freedom.

You're missing the point that there are very good reasons for that
restriction and that it is a very minor restriction compared to those
that you're so willing to forgive the proprietary world.

> The GPL is the part that carries the restriction and
> removes people's freedom.

If you're not able to appreciate the difference in scale between
the relative loss of freedom between proprietary and open source software
there isn't much point in having a discussion.

> No, in fact it has probably done more to keep Microsoft in
> business that any other single thing because it's restrictions
> ensure that certain functions can never be added.

If that were true, BSD would be ruling the world.  It doesn't have such
a restriction yet it is much less popular than Linux.  You need to think
about why Linux is so much more popular.

Sean

-- 
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux