In article <2413156.N0kZA8SX2K@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The next frontier for GPL Violations
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | By going after vendors who violate the GPL by incorporating enhanced code
> | into non-GPL products, Harold Welte & Co. have won a ton of goodwill within
> | the open source community.
> `----
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2027
Here are the interesting parts of that blog entry:
But thereâ??s another type of GPL Violation, one hinted at in the
groupâ??s workshops and implied with the growth of tools like Hewlett
Packardâ??s Fossology.
This is the user violation.
You download GPL code, you tweak it for your own operation, you
maintain the tweak solely for your own use, but you donâ??t share the
tweak, either for a market advantage, out of ignorance, or from pure
laziness.
How do we enforce the GPL against users without causing a backlash?
and
There is a real problem here. Combining GPL software with other open
source products, or merely tweaking GPL software for your own use,
obligates you to contribute those code enhancements back to the
community.
But finding such small tweaks, then enforcing the GPL against the
tweakers, risks a backlash unless it is done carefully.
The author is *completely* *clueless* about the GPL. (No wonder Roy
cites him).
--
--Tim Smith
|
|
