Hmm... here we go again :) M.S.Yatnatti wrote:
> Linux distributions are free. Free means freedom and not about cost. > whether they call themselves free or commercial. GPL is all about > four freedoms not about cost. FSF suggest the few words to be > avoided one among them is commercial. > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html And ... ? [snipping off some of the stuff, since we have been recursively going over this for a while] > Disclaimer: This is not legal opinion. This is only for debate. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dict.asp?Word=debate has some interesting explanations of the word debate. One of the words there is consideration. Now, in any form of debate, each party 'listens' to the other and thereupon attempts to build upon pre-existing argument data in order to arrive at some conclusion. I don't see that happening in the threads you have initiated. So, what gives ? Discussing about Free Software, Commercial Software, GPL and related licensing is appropriate for a LUG list. However, not many here are qualified lawyers and I'd still request you to get in touch with SFLC, or even the FSF's legal folks or GPL-Violation folks if you feel that Red Hat has violated GPL. In each case, you would be required to provide some sort of start off point or evidence to support your contention. -- http://www.gutenberg.net - Fine literature digitally re-published http://www.plos.org - Public Library of Science http://www.creativecommons.org - Flexible copyright for creative work _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- [email protected] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
