On Friday 31 December 2010 15:18:59 Kenneth Gonsalves wrote: > On Fri, 2010-12-31 at 14:01 +0530, jtd wrote: > > > True. The GPL was designed to ensure wins for both the > > > developer and the end user. The party that loses in this system > > > is the distributor - he now has to play by the rules, or drop > > > out of the system altogether. GPL-violations.org tracks those > > > distributors who are being difficult about it. > > > > Only violators are losers. Whoever abides by the rules and > > tailors his > > business to the rules wins, including distributors - in a way > > everyone is a minor contibutor to the overall system and everyone > > is a distributor, including distro vendors like canonical, > > slackware, whoever. Whiccever way you look at it, everyone is > > taking orders of magnitude more than they are putting in. The > > best part is this is intended by design.
> but I *do* believe that he has drafted the GPL for the > purpose of protecting the rights of a publisher of source code in > the open. At least I hope so. If one keeps the source code private > (between two individuals), then of what use is GPLing it (apart > from bragging rights - 'I am a foss programmer because my code is > GPLed'). True. Besides the whole point of the gpl is to get others to contribute. After all there are far more creative guys outside than inside. -- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
