[gentoo-user] Re: License issues [was:Daniel Robbins' come back ?]

[Michael Schmarck <michael.schmarck@habmalnefrage.de>]

James <wireless@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:

> Etaoin Shrdlu <shrdlu <at> unlimitedmail.org> writes:
> 
> 
>> What you're saying here is not a secret, in fact these are all more or
>> less well-known facts. Yes, they probably did violate some open source
>> license. However, I don't see how having had closed source products
>> would have prevented them from doing what they wanted to do anyway.
>> And furthermore, what does all this have to do with "making money with
>> open source"?
> 
> 
> I just do not see the harm in letting a small (sub 1 million dollar
> company) build a product and not provide any details or what they did or
> how they did it.

Why should they be allowed to gain a profit from something, that the
FLOSS community made, without giving anything back at all (and if it
is just source code in an uncommented/undocumented fashion)?

> In the end, their success is more likely related 

Why should somebody care, if they are successful?

> The GPL goes a long way to discouraging/preventing many of the serfs
> from ever trying.... IMHO. I believe that the GPL is the spawn of satan.

Absolutely disagree. I think the GPL is good the way it is.

> I think the 'serfs' (the greater gentoo community) would be better
> off with a BSD style license related to Gentoo technologies and
> still use GPL software, as the individual chooses. 

I don't think so.

Michael

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list