"Rahul Dhesi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hyman Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Different people have different goals. People who do not share
the goals enforced by the GPL ought not to distribute their work
using it. But they should expect that people who do share the
goals of the GPL will ignore their work.
I think we should not classify all people into these two categories.
Most people have varying goals at varying times, so they can happily
coexist with many types of licenses, including the GPL.
Only on Usenet (and perhaps within Microsoft) do we find people who can
only ever criticize the GPL and pretend to never see any value in it.
These people are hypocrites, because you will find them furtively using
GPL-based products. They secretly do Google searches, even though they
know perfectly well that these searches are done on GPL'd OSes.
Microsoft, despite its pious anti-GPL claims, uses a GPL-based content
distribution system (called Akamai) to distribute its software updates.
--
"Done on GPL'd OSes"? It is more the case that GOOG's software does all the
heavy lifting and Linux is only around for a few mundane scheduling and IO
utility funtions. It is like a breakfast of ham and eggs, as it has been
said. The chicken (Linux) was peripherally involved, but the hog (GOOG) was
fully committed.
I think that OSS and Linux fill a need, particularly for companies like GOOG
and IBM that have no participative advantage in so far as the OS is
concerned and they can easily afford to disclose code to others if only to
irritate Microsoft.
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
