____/ [H]omer on Saturday 01 March 2008 04:24 : \____
> 7 wrote:
>
>> I think the key here is not to mix up GPL and anti-drm. A separate
>> anti-drm license extension should be produced for certain projects
>> that are key to targeting drm related violators of free software. It
>> would only apply to certain key projects like codecs for example so
>> that free software developers can use them on projects with higher
>> than usual risks of violators being attracted to it like a magnet.
>
> Sounds reasonable.
>
> The problem is that the kind of people who abuse Free Software are not,
> neither are those who evangelise Intellectual Monopoly.
>
> The fact is that /all/ software, Free or otherwise, is "high risk",
> given the predatory nature of certain companies.
They sometimes blame the investors' needs. Just the other day, Sun knocked down
MySQL's anti0swpatents page and Simon Phipps blamed investors' needs. Shame
Sun for that one.
#
-1.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Steve Ballmer is even monkier than his moniker suggests
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
10:20:01 up 36 days, 20:14, 3 users, load average: 1.47, 0.65, 0.85
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project
|
|
