On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Ragi Y. Burhum <r...@burhum.com> wrote: > The original comment was about open source (it may have been a joke, or > maybe serious). However, you used the term "GPL" interchangeably, and that > was the origin of my comment. > Anyway, some of us don't leave in academia-world and do consulting to pay > the bills. In this business-world, we have to make the best decision for our > customers and *explain* to them what is best for them. In certain cases, > *shrug*, open source is not the best solution. In many scenarios, the > license is the real deal killer. Sometimes, these companies don't feel > comfortable with GPL - and with reason. > But make no mistake, in many cases, GPL is used to protect the > ***creator's*** original intention with the source code, not the ***user***. > Actually, I am not against that, they created it, it is their *right* to do > so. But calling that " freedom for the **user** " is just regurgitating > licensing political speech. If you want to talk "freedom of the ***user***", > then licenses like BSD give the ***user*** far more freedom. > Ugh, I think I started a license talk. Lame. Sorry. > Happy Holidays for everyone - even all you GPLv3-loving-people! :-)
I couldn't have said it better myself. Great post, Ragi. _______________________________________________ LinuxUsers mailing list LinuxUsers@socallinux.org http://socallinux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linuxusers
