On 4/19/07, Nishit Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/19/07, A G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > <so much> >
Part II Of course, both Vista and Linux are distributed under licenses, but there is a major difference between their terms. Vista EULAs very minutely specify what you can do with it, while the GNU/Linux licenses, predominantly GPL, only disallow redistribution of the 'work' or its 'derivatives' under a different license, thereby ensuring that what has once been 'freed' stays 'Free'. It is a matter of copyright, and not ownership. Consider it this way: you require a license to drive your car. If you break traffic rules wantonly, your license can be revoked, and you would no longer be allowed to drive your car. Software licenses also intend to do the same thing. However, in case of a car, it could be driven (if undamaged) by your spouse, your brother or your driver and unless it were impounded, the RTO cannot keep it off the road. The RTO also does not have any say in whether you use your car to go to the office, shopping, hauling bootleg liquor or two-timing with your flirty colleague. The same situation applies to OS use. However, Vista specifies that you can use it for the first two purposes only, and not the other two. Any 'unauthorised' use of the OS can lock it up under the protection system. Under the GPL, however, you are able to do whatever you want with it, short of the one restriction - call it driving over footpath residents. And even then, only your license is revoked, for that specific 'work'. There are other laws that deal with abuse separately. Contd. part III -- ______________________________________________________________________ Pune GNU/Linux Users Group Mailing List: ([email protected]) List Information: http://plug.org.in/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/plug-mail Send 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for mailing instructions.
