> Matt Asay wrote:
Free software has lost. Open source has won.
This is the usual preposterous nonsense from those who
willfully misunderstand and misrepresent the difference
between the two.
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 22:49:27 +, Azz Pizz wrote:
> Rick wrote in
> news:puydnzbdwypofilxnz2dnuvz_r5i4...@supernews.com:
>
>> On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 22:04:13 +, Azz Pizz wrote:
>>
>>> Rick wrote in
>>> news:kkadnbabnz7z-clxnz2dnuvz_redn...@supernews.com:
>>>
>>>
No, the intent is for
On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 22:04:13 +, Azz Pizz wrote:
> Rick wrote in
> news:kkadnbabnz7z-clxnz2dnuvz_redn...@supernews.com:
>
>
>> No, the intent is for the copyrights to remain in place.
>>
>>
> Isn't for a lot of people the waiver an additional reason to not make it
> public domain?
What?
Rjack stated in post mdednbh7m6qg8ylxnz2dnuvz_vcdn...@giganews.com on
9/27/09 6:52 AM:
> Snit wrote:
>> Rick stated in post kkadnbabnz7z-clxnz2dnuvz_redn...@supernews.com
>> on 9/27/09 6:15 AM:
>>
The idiotic attempt by Richard Stallman to re-define the
meaning of the word "free" is an
Snit wrote:
Rick stated in post kkadnbabnz7z-clxnz2dnuvz_redn...@supernews.com
on 9/27/09 6:15 AM:
The idiotic attempt by Richard Stallman to re-define the
meaning of the word "free" is an abject failure.
Stallman has not tried to re-difine free. Get a dictionary.
The dictionary does not tal
Rick stated in post kkadnbabnz7z-clxnz2dnuvz_redn...@supernews.com on
9/27/09 6:15 AM:
>> The idiotic attempt by Richard Stallman to re-define the meaning of the
>> word "free" is an abject failure.
>
> Stallman has not tried to re-difine free. Get a dictionary.
The dictionary does not talk abou
ever been granted by a United States Federal Court. All
GPL complaints have been voluntarily withdrawn long before a judge
could ever read a single word of the license.
The point of Matt Assay's CNET article:
Free software is dead. Long live open source
http://news.cnet.com/openroad/
is tha
Rick wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 08:57:54 -0400, Rjack wrote:
Rjack wrote: The GPL's failure is the fanatic desire of its
authors to control other folk's contributions.
The GPL doesn't try to control anything. It was written to make
sure code couldn't be removed from community benefit.
Hav
nted by a United States Federal Court. All
> GPL complaints have been voluntarily withdrawn long before a judge could
> ever read a single word of the license.
The cases have been settled, not withdrawn. And, AFAIK, the cases have
resulted in the source code being distributed.
>
> The poi
Rjack wrote:
> Why do you want to take control of another author's BSD licensed code?
> The BSD author has already freely offered it to anyone who chooses to
> use it. Only anti-capitalist GPL control freaks want to control other
> author's source code.
The funny thing is that quite a few compani
Azz Pizz wrote:
Rjack wrote in
news:t9ydnbrayq6e3sdxnz2dnuvz_jcdn...@giganews.com:
It appears that the Free Software Foundation is rapidly
succeeding in killing off "Free Software".
I was extremely unhappy when in the GPLv3 drafting process
Stallman's idea of banning "trusted" computing
On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 17:29:03 +1200, Adam wrote:
> So what is the new Michael Moore film like ?
> Anyone seen it ?
I've met Michael several times and despite my being a right
winger, to a degree, I like him.
He is a very intelligent person who really tries to make you
think.
Actually he is brilli
> and useless as it is in government.
>
> Free software has lost. Open source has won. We're all the better for it."
>
> September 25, 2009 10:42 AM PDT
> Free software is dead. Long live open source
> by Matt Asay
> http://news.cnet.com/openroad/
>
>
;re all the better for it."
September 25, 2009 10:42 AM PDT
Free software is dead. Long live open source
by Matt Asay
http://news.cnet.com/openroad/
Sincerely,
Rjack
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
14 matches
Mail list logo
