* Sebastian Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The main point is that this also disallows the usage within NonOSS > software. That's what counts. Many OSS licenses do not care about later > closed usage, and so one backdoor is closed, where GPL code may become > unfree. > For me, some of the so called OSS licenses undermine the freedom and I > don't want them to be spread anymore. BSD is the one license where > freedom goes the step to far and is suicide.
We already had to learn these hard lessons in xf86 times (and still going on w/ x.org): hw companies can close the sources of their own forks and do not need to give back anything. It even gets worse with the Linux kernel, where those trolls are allowed to publish propriatary driver crap (yes, 99% of the proprietary kernel drivers I had to cope with, like nv stuff *are* really crap which tends to lock up the whole machine). At least for the vital parts of a system, this is very bad. cu -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Enrico Weigelt == metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce: http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions: http://patches.metux.de/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- -- [email protected] mailing list
