begin oe_protect.scr
spike1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <spike1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> did eloquently scribble:
>> Now, more than ever, we need the Free Software Foundation
>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | If you are using Suse, please remove it and use a Free version of
>> | Linux like Debian or Slackware. I'm calling for a boycott of all
>> | software, services and products Novell. Don't purchase, license or
>> | download any Novell Linux or software products as long as Novell
>> | is in violation of the GPL.
>> `----
>
>> http://www.openaddict.com/comment.php?comment.news.227
>
>> It might be the first among something larger that will evolve to become a
>> trend.
>
> How the heck are they "in violation of the GPL"?
>
> The GPL has no clauses restricting who you can sign deals with. Microsoft is
> quite free to use, distribute and rerelease GPL'd software itself... In
> fact, I've heard they do, occasionally, to a limited extent.
>
> So apart from the foolhardiness of actually signing a deal with microsoft...
> What breakage of the GPL have they committed?
There's nothing obvious to me. What concerned me was some FUD-based
deal about "not suing for IPR" or something like that. This seems to be
more around finding a replacement for the clearly defunct SCO case in
terms of finding something the lawyers can be scared of. As several
people have noted, it's amazing that after the last set of deals Novell
did with Microsoft that they'd even /consider/ doing another one, but
there we go.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Don't tell me that worry doesn't do any good. I know better. The things
I worry about don't happen.
-- Watchman Examiner
|
|
