Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> Signal and Noise in GPLv3
>
> ,----[ Quote
>| In an email to me last month, Linus Torvalds, who has been portrayed in the
>| media as GPLv3's main opponent, describes the language that he and other use
>| on the Linux kernel mailing list as "blunt, to the point, and not very
>| polite." When journalists quote pieces of it, he notes, often "the context of
>| that language is then lost entirely" -- and he adds that "it's not just the
>| text of the thread itself that is the context; the context is also how
>| technical people discussing things amongst each other is in itself a very
>| different context than a trade magazine article."
> `----
>
> http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/article.php/3692201
>
At some point, Mr Torvalds will realise just why the changes to the GPL
are so important. Fundamentally, it's about freedom, it's about
avoiding lock-in. In the longer-run, this will be better economically,
which means that everyone, including the writers of GPLed code, will be
better off with GPLv3, not worse off. Only those who wish to do some
kind of lock-in thing, some kind of secrecy, wrest some kind of control
over the behaviour of users or integrators or programmers, really have
anything to lose from GPLv3.
>
> Related:
>
> Misleading InformationWeek GPLv3 article
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| Linus's position is clear. He's repeatedly said that he'd use GPLv3 in
>| certain situations if there was a practical advantage, but he prefers v2 over
>| v3. That's fine. I prefer v3, but v2 is still a great licence.
> `----
>
> http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/blogs/misleading_informationweek_gplv3_article
>
>
> Why does Microsoft seem scared of GPLv3?
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| Microsoft is extremely keen to avoid "legal debate" over whether its recent
>| partnerships with Linux firms such as Novell, Xandros, and Linspire, mean
>| Redmond must assume any of the new licences' legal obligations.
> `----
>
> http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/Why-does-Microsoft-seem-scared-of-GPLv3-/0,130061733,339279673,00.htm
>
>
> Microsoft disses GPLv3 (and rocketman Kirk)
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| This is Thursday's IT Blogwatch: in which Microsoft squirms out of GPLv3's
>| clutches, perhaps.
> `----
>
> http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/5823
>
>
> The Badger Game
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| So, by threatening everything and promising nothing (because would Microsoft
>| really sue anyone for patents, knowing how many competitors in the Linux
>| community have patents of their own?), Microsoft has skillfully managed to
>| get open source players to endorse Open XML. A variant of the classic Badger
>| Game if I ever heard one.
>|
>| Faced with cons like this, I am beginning to realise that having something
>| like the GPLv3 around is a very good idea. Even though the new GPL could not
>| have prevented this scam, it may help in the future.
> `----
>
> http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2007071302826OPMSPB
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
|
|
