Actually, the GPL doesn't require you make all your software Open Source
(GPL) - only stuff derived from the GPL'd code. Of course, the MPL also
does that. And yes, Ballmer I'm certain knows this - they are very
specifically confusing the issues.
jeff
"Tony Lambiris" said:
>http://www.suntimes.com/output/tech/cst-fin-micro01.html
>
>Besides calling Linux a cancer, he obviously has his licenses mixed up. I
>quote: "Open source is not available to commercial companies. The way the
>license is written, if you use any open-source software, you have to make
>the rest of your software open source." He is obviously talking about
GPL. I
>think its unfair of him to make this gross generalization about open
source
>licenses. I think the editor should've made a note to it's readers... the
>last thing we need is more FUD's on open source.
>
>---------------
>Tony Lambiris [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>PC Support Specialist
>P: 603-324-3000 x 234
>C: 603-759-8384
>"Microsoft doesn't believe in free() code."Besi
>
>
>**********************************************************
>To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
>*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
>unsubscribe gnhlug
>**********************************************************
>
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
