__/ [ Mark Kent ] on Monday 25 September 2006 23:36 \__
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Peter Köhlmann <peter.koehlmann@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> Mark Kent wrote:
>>
>>> begin oe_protect.scr
>>> thad01@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <thad01@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> espoused:
>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> True. I guess you identified the root of the problem. Licenses needn't
>>>>> be modified unless a wave of new threats is rising (notably DRM in this
>>>>> case).
>>>>
>>>> DRM, and I seem to remember patent issues raising their ugly little
>>>> heads. Groklaw has covered the debate quite a bit, though I'll admit
>>>> to not paying a whole lot of attention to the details.
>>>
>>> In a few years, the reasons for GPL3 will seem so clear and obvious,
>>> that few will recall why anyone argued against it.
>>>
>>> Restricting the freedom of people in order to further business interests
>>> is /never/ good, not even for businesses.
>>>
>>
>> It seems a lot of people disagree on GPL3. This includes Linus Torvalds
>> and the kernel maintainers
>> And it seems they have quite some valid reasons to reject the currently
>> proposed GPL3 entirely
>
> I fully appreciate that there's disagreement; I just think the
> long-term significance of the issues is less than clear to the
> naysayers.
I'm with the FSF on this one, as I said before. OSDL goes for compliance and
blind acceptance, IMO. Stand for nothing, then fall for anything.
|
|
