ROFL
Monday, June 30, 2008
GPLv3 One Year Anniversary Edition 06/29/08
The GPL v3 Watch List is intended to give you a snapshot of the
GPLv3/LGPLv3/AGPLv3 adoption for the past year.
This Edition:
GPLv3 - One Year Later
GPLv3 - 10,000 projects
Interviews
Conversation With Chris
Enjoy... ROFL
http://daveshields.wordpress.com/2007/11/14/video-of-eben-moglens-talk-at-ibm-research-now-available-online/
---
Video of Eben Moglens Talk at IBM Research Now Available Online
I just got a note from Joe Latone of IBM Research that brought the happy
news that the video of
James White wrote:
I'm sorry, but I just couldn't read much past this totally asinine
statement:
Nobody should be able to stop you from writing any code that want, ***and
GPLv3 protects this right for you***.
When were the GPL folks given the right to write and establish what IS the
James White wrote:
The most relevant 2 paragraphs, since you apparently weren't even able to
read that far.
Neutralizing Laws That Prohibit Free Software - But Not Forbidding
DRMYou're probably familiar with the Digital Restrictions Management
(DRM) on DVDs and other media. You're probably also
Nobody should be able to stop you from writing any code that want, ***and
GPLv3 protects this right for you***.
When were the GPL folks given the right to write and establish what IS the
LAW?
Copyright law gives the copyright holder that right, as long as the
terms do not violate
The most relevant 2 paragraphs, since you apparently weren't even able to
read that far.
Neutralizing Laws That Prohibit Free Software - But Not Forbidding
DRMYou're probably familiar with the Digital Restrictions Management
(DRM) on DVDs and other media. You're probably also familiar with the
James White wrote:
I'm sorry, but I just couldn't read much past this totally asinine
statement:
Nobody should be able to stop you from writing any code that want,
***and GPLv3 protects this right for you***.
When were the GPL folks given the right to write and establish what
IS the LAW?
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
James White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nobody should be able to stop you from writing any code that want, ***and
GPLv3 protects this right for you***.
When were the GPL folks given the right to write and establish what IS the
LAW?
I don't see any mention of law in
I'm sorry, but I just couldn't read much past this totally asinine
statement:
Nobody should be able to stop you from writing any code that want, ***and
GPLv3 protects this right for you***.
When were the GPL folks given the right to write and establish what IS the
LAW?
--
James E. White
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 01:04:06PM -0500, James White wrote:
Nobody should be able to stop you from writing any code that want, ***and
GPLv3 protects this right for you***.
When were the GPL folks given the right to write and establish what IS the
LAW?
Well, if you contest it you must thing
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html
--
A Quick Guide to GPLv3
by Brett Smith
[This article is also available in PDF and reStructuredText formats.]
After a year and a half of public consultation, thousands of comments,
and four drafts, version 3 of the GNU General
http://daveshields.wordpress.com/2007/10/29/eben-moglen-copyleft-capitalism-gplv3-and-the-future-of-software-innovation/
Today I heard the best single presentation on open-source and free
software I have ever personally attended, in a talk by Columbia
Professor of Law Eben Moglen, on the
Ha ha.
---
Microsoft cannot declare itself exempt from the requirements of GPLv3
Microsoft has engaged in anticompetitive conduct in the software
industry for many years, and has sought to attack free software for
almost as long, Free Software Foundation says
BOSTON, Massachusetts,
Washington, DC Office
1401 K Street NW | Suite 502
Washington, DC 20005
Brussels Office
Square de Meeus, 35
B-1000 Brussels
Belgium
(emphasis removed below)
--
Can the GPLv3 Make Microsoft Grant Patent Licences to the Free Software
Community?
The FSF has finally released
http://www.linuxelectrons.com/news/linux/10565/microsoft-issues-statement-concerning-gplv3-novell-agreement
Microsoft Issues Statement Concerning the GPLv3 and Novell Agreement
Published: Thursday, July 05 2007 @ 7:04 PM CDT
Contributed by: Tommy
Today, Microsoft issued the following
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3686486
---
Stallman Urges Users to Upgrade to GPLv3
By Sean Michael Kerner
After nearly 16 years of use, the GPL -- the cornerstone license of the
Free Software Movement -- has officially been revised.
GPL version 3 (GPLv3) was released
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS4771709849.html
---
GPLv3 arrives, but nobody seems to care
Jun. 29, 2007
I've been following the evolution of this latest version of the seminal
open-source license since it was a twinkle in Richard M. Stallman's eye.
I have no no doubt that a lot of hard
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Gardner/?p=2489
---
June 30th, 2007
Sun demurs from adopting GPL v3 for OpenSolaris, keeps CDDL only
Posted by Dana Gardner @ 7:21 am
Categories: Open Source, Software Infrastructure, Enterprise Java,
Linux, Microsoft, Windows, IBM, Sun Microsystems, Red Hat,
http://www.thejemreport.com/mambo/content/view/317/
---
GPLv3 license marks GNU's decline
Written by Jem Matzan
Jun 29, 2007 at 08:20 AM
The GNU General Public License version 3 is unleashed to the world
today, ready and willing to conquer perceived problems with the legal
http://sheehantu.wordpress.com/2007/06/30/free-software-licenses-in-a-nutshell/
---
Free Software Licenses in a Nutshell
When I jumped into the Linux/open-source world I didnt know nor care
about the different licenses software had attached with it. I guess I
was used to adhering to
ROTFL
http://www.fsf.org/iphone-gplv3
---
iPhone restricts users, GPLv3 frees them
BOSTON, Massachusetts, USAThursday, June 28, 2007On Friday, June 29,
not everyone in the continental U.S. will be waiting in line to purchase
a $500 iPhone. In fact, hundreds of thousands of digital
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS8688613635.html
---
GPL version 3 arrives
Jun. 29, 2007
As expected, the FSF (Free Software Foundation) released the
long-awaited GPLv3 (GNU General Public License version 3), the third
generation of the world's most popular free software license.
Since
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ROTFL
http://www.fsf.org/iphone-gplv3
---
iPhone restricts users, GPLv3 frees them
BOSTON, Massachusetts, USA-Thursday, June 28, 2007-On Friday, June 29,
not everyone in the continental U.S. will be waiting
Professor Stallman?
RMS is a honorary professor at several universities.
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
http://www.crn.com/software/21154
-
GPL 3 Set To Go Live
By Stacy Cowley, CRN
4:51 PM EDT Mi. Jun. 27, 2007 A multiyear process to draft a successor
to the GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2, the most widely used
open-source software license, will end this week, as the GPL
http://www.itbusinessedge.com/item/?ci=30043
-
Rosen: GPL Is Good, but OSL Is Better
Source: IT Business Edge | Priority: Leveraging Open Source | Topic:
Open Source Licenses
Date Published: 6/21/2007
With Lawrence Rosen, founding partner of Rosenlaw Einschlag, a
technology law
Rosen: GPL Is Good, but OSL Is Better
GPLv3 isn't Stallman's ideal licence either.
He would prefer that the tivoisation and patent clauses be stronger, but as
well as writing a licence that is better than GPLv2, Stallman is writing a
licence that people will use. If nobody uses a licence,
http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/06/26/gpl-v3-the-qa-part-1-the-license/
-
GPL v3, the QA: part 1- the license
Q: So why are we here?
A: At the end of this week, after 16 years, the Free Software Foundation
should bless version three of the GNU General Public License, the sequel
to what is
Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
Rosen: GPL Is Good, but OSL Is Better
GPLv3 isn't Stallman's ideal licence either.
He would prefer that the tivoisation and patent clauses be stronger, but as
well as writing a licence that is better than GPLv2, Stallman is writing a
licence that people will
Er..
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
Rosen: GPL Is Good, but OSL Is Better
GPLv3 isn't Stallman's ideal licence either.
He would prefer that the tivoisation and patent clauses be stronger, but as
well as writing a licence that is better than GPLv2, Stallman is
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2148866,00.asp
Is Open Source Dying?
By Michael Hickins
June 21, 2007
Opinion: Some good ideas are too good for this world. Is this one of
them?
On the face of it, open-source software has been gaining ground of late.
The much-anticipated
Over there on LKML... the thread is unfolding... LOL.
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Here's an idea that just occurred to me, after all the discussions
about motivations, tit-for-tat, authors' wishes and all.
If GPLv3 were to have a clause that permitted combination/linking with
code under GPLv2,
Al Viro wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:15:03PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 21, 2007, Al Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:39:07AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
- the kernel Linux could use code from GPLv3 projects
... and inherit GPLv3
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 21, 2007, Al Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:00:22PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Do you agree that if there's any single contributor who thinks it
can't be tivoized, and he manages his opinion to prevail in court
against a
Kudos to Eben. :-)
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 22, 2007, Tomas Neme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The thing is, what matters in copyright and licencing matters is what
the author of the code understands, no the licence's author, if
ambiguous. And the kernel's rights holder is Linus.
http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments/rt/summarydecision.html?filename=%%20gplv3-draft-2%20%id=3380
---
Comment 3380: Combining propietary and GPL code
This Comment is resolved by:
This Comment is part of the discussion on:
Regarding the text: Inclusion of a covered work in an aggregate does not
http://www.rosenlaw.com/GPLv3-Comments.htm
---
Comments on GPLv3
by Lawrence Rosen[1]
Many long months ago I committed to help Eben Moglen and his colleagues
at the Free Software Foundation and the Software Freedom Law Center
write a better license than GPLv2. They have done so and I
Al Viro wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 02:56:24AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Can you please acknowledge that it doesn't, such that I can feel I've
fulfilled my goal of dispelling the myth that the GPLv3 changes the
spirit of the GPL?
No. I don't do metaphysics. This thread alone
Joshua David Williams wrote:
On 6/17/07, Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Everybody else just cares about the legal reasons.
The legal terms is the only reason a license *exists*. That's what a
license *is*, for crying out loud!
If you don't care about the legal side, go
Jan Harkes wrote:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 08:31:30PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 18, 2007, Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the GPLv3 world, we have already discussed in this thread how you can
follow the GPLv3 by making the TECHNICALLY INFERIOR choice of using a ROM
FSF is so caught up in their own agenda that they're
forgetting the whole point - the freedom of choice.
Who's whole point?
They're so caught up in the whole point of the freedoms they value (being
able to help yourself, and each person being able to cooperate with each
other is the point)
Al Viro wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 12:31:00AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
I'm not trying to say why Linus and others chose the GPLv2.
I'm not trying to determine what their motivations were.
I'm not trying to force them to change to GPLv3.
I'm not trying to convince them
http://technocrat.net/d/2007/6/15/21602
--
GPLv3, DFSG, Tivo, and GPLv3 (a different part of it)
Timothy Brownawell Fri, 15 Jun 2007 19:32:37 PDT Open Source Software
The current draft of the GNU GPL v3 includes several paragraphs intended
to prevent Tivoization, or the use of GPL
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Michael Gerdau wrote:
I beg to differ. By adopting _his_ license you adopted his view.
I'm sorry, but that's simply bullshit.
The GPLv2 does not state that you have to become a slave of rms and follow
him in all things, and agree with him.
Nice picture, follow the link.
http://linux.sys-con.com/read/390392.htm
--
Think Linus Will Defer to Sun on GPLv3? The Answer May Hinge on a Bottle
of Wine
I didn't really expect them to open source Java either so it's not like
I'm infallible in my predictions
By: Java News Desk
Jun. 16,
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Rob Landley wrote:
Er, copyright law is federal, contract law is generally state
level? So not only does contract law vary a lot more by
jurisdiction, but it's enforced by different courts than suits over
copyright? (You'll notice the GPL doesn't say which state
Al Viro wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:57:59PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 16, 2007, Bernd Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What this means for the FSF goals if Tivo get up one morning and
SFLC is looking for cheap labor
...
That's how it reads to me.
Well, don't sign up then.
Sheesh.
--
Ciarán O'Riordan __ \ http://fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3
http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ _ \ GPLv3 and other work supported by
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/weblog \
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6121484436.html
--
Linspire, Microsoft in Linux-related deal
Jun. 13, 2007
Linspire Inc. on June 13 announced an agreement to license voice-enabled
instant messaging, Windows Media 10 CODECs, and TrueType font
technologies from Microsoft for its Linux
Over there on LKML... chuckles
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Look, there was room for misunderstandings in earlier drafts of the
license. Based on the public comments, the wording was improved. I'd
like to think the issues that arose from
I'm almost inclined to donate some EUROs to RMS/FSF and Eben's law firm
SFLC for all that fun... chuckles
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
In other words, Red Hat distributes copies (and yes, you *get* that copy),
and you cannot modify that copy that
Being finished with the GPLv3 (life after...) Eben invites lawyers to
apply and participate in this program. However, please keep in mind that
all participants will need to arrange for their own accommodations in
the New York City area for the duration of the program. Participants
will also be
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Last I looked, TiVO was not the author of Linux. Did you sell out or
something? ;-P :-D
You're a moron.
I'm the original author, and I selected the GPLv2 for Linux.
Tivo accepted that, and followed the GPLv2.
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 14, 2007, Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- I chose the GPLv2, fully understanding that the Tivo kind of
situation is ok.
Wow, do you remember the date when you first thought of this business
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 14, 2007, Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. I'm not stupid.
The GPLv3 explicitly allows removing additional permissions.
So what? You just refrain from accepting contributions that attempt
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Is there anything other than TiVOization to justify these statements?
Do you need anything else?
But if by the question you mean would you think the GPLv3 is fine without
the new language in section 6 about the
http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/one_plus_one_is_fifty
--
Wednesday Jun 13, 2007
An OpenSolaris/Linux Mashup
To non-technical readers of this blog, or those uninterested in the ebbs
and tides of the free software world... this might be a good entry to
skip.
I was just forwarded a
http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/one_plus_one_is_fifty#comment-1181726726000
--
Jonathan, I wish the above was true. 15 years ago I was the biggest Sun
fan. Today I speak as the project leader for another set of open source
projects -- OpenBSD and OpenSSH. OpenSSH will be better known to
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=40264
--
Torvalds remains unconvinced by GPL3
Backward step
By INQUIRER newsdesk: Tuesday 12 June 2007, 11:07
LINUX TORVALDS is not convinced that the upcoming third version of the
General Public Licence (GPLv3) is a good thing.
I still
On 2007-06-12, Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sin Microsystems
*giggle*
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=40264
No major open source distros have yet lined up behind the GPLv3. Sin
Microsystems has been one of its most vocal supporters so far,
suggesting that it might choose the licence for its Solaris operating
system.
Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
On 2007-06-10, Lee Hollaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But the thing I was thinking about if the House bill had passed was that
any contribution by a government contractor (like a university research
project) would be in the public domain. How might that affect the
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
On 2007-06-10, Lee Hollaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But the thing I was thinking about if the House bill had passed was that
any contribution by a government contractor (like a university research
project) would be in the public domain. How
On Jun 9, 5:47 am, Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.informationweek.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199902779
--
Pick YourOpenSourcePoison: Microsoft's Patent Claims Or GPLv3
Controversy swirls around the revised General Public License, and
Microsoft keeps the heat
Seg, 2007-06-11 às 17:31 +, sourceview escreveu:
I must take exception to your initial ideological statement
(assumption of fact not proven) which states that most open source
software is gpled. I wholeheartedly disagree, and if we were to use
precise quantitative terms, the figure would
Seg, 2007-06-11 às 10:37 -0500, rjack escreveu:
Using anything beside a Free Software Foundation approved license is the
the equivalent of clubbing innocent baby seals.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070611082734557
Hah, how quickly you transform
Microsoft clubbing the Free
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lee Hollaar) writes:
In the 108th Congress, there was an effort (H.R. 2613) to extend that
to works produced under government contracts. Copyright protection
under this title is not available for any work produced pursuant to
scientific research substantially funded by the
On 2007-06-10, Lee Hollaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But the thing I was thinking about if the House bill had passed was that
any contribution by a government contractor (like a university research
project) would be in the public domain. How might that affect the GPL,
and if it did, would it
Arnoud writes:
Why would it affect the GPL?
It would not have affected the GPL. What it would have done is caused some
works that were released under the GPL to be effectively placed in the
public domain. It also would have resulted in a bunch of stuff that ended
up closed source being
http://www.informationweek.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199902779
--
Pick Your Open Source Poison: Microsoft's Patent Claims Or GPLv3
Controversy swirls around the revised General Public License, and
Microsoft keeps the heat on.
By Charles Babcock
InformationWeek
Jun 9, 2007 12:00
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.informationweek.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199902779
Underscoring the user community's clout, Robert J.
Carey, CIO of the Navy, last week issued a memo mandating that open
source be considered in all Navy software
Lee Hollaar wrote:
[...]
It is interesting to ponder what that might do to GPLed software written
in universities under federal grants and contracts.
Note DARPA below.
http://tuxdeluxe.org/node/211
--
Roads to the GPL
Posted June 6th, 2007 by editor
in Software Libre Richard
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lee Hollaar) writes:
In the 108th Congress, there was an effort (H.R. 2613) to extend that
to works produced under government contracts. Copyright protection
under this title is not available for any work
Lee Hollaar writes:
But the thing I was thinking about if the House bill had passed was that
any contribution by a government contractor (like a university research
project) would be in the public domain. How might that affect the GPL,
and if it did, would it mean the loss of a great source
Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
We have customers who have switched from Linspire to Novell because
Novell offers patent protection with Microsoft.
GPLv3 will prevent what Novell did, so no more customers will leave Linspire
for this reason.
Sez who?
Novell welcomed grandfathering and
Great picture - follow the link :-)
http://eclipse.sys-con.com/read/386632.htm
--
Microsoft Spits in GPL Creator Richard Stallman's Eye
Xandros is also supposed to ship Open XML-OpenDocument translators in
its desktop software
By: XML News Desk
Jun. 8, 2007 09:15 AM
Digg This!
Goodness,
Hey GNUtian ciaran, I'd greatly appreciate your comments (other GNUtians
are welcomed to comment as well). TIA.
http://www.informationweek.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199902101
--
Microsoft Strikes Linux Patent Deal With LG Electronics
Under a deal with LG Electronics, Microsoft will
MS are trying to chalk down as many of these deals before GPLv3 comes into
circulation because they know that people will stop being interested at that
point.
If MS were really confident in their patent portfolio, they wouldn't have to
hand over so much money in each deal, as mentioned here:
We have customers who have switched from Linspire to Novell because
Novell offers patent protection with Microsoft.
GPLv3 will prevent what Novell did, so no more customers will leave Linspire
for this reason.
...although users may still leave Linspire for other reasons, such as
spreading FUD
http://www.linspire.com/linspire_letter.php
--
GPLv3 - Unforseen Consequences?
by Kevin Carmony (President CEO Linspire, Inc.)
June 5th, 2007
The FSF (Free Software Foundation) recently released their latest draft
of the proposed new GPL license, v3. In its current form, GPLv3 may
More from Carmony:
http://forum.freespire.org/showpost.php?p=63026postcount=35
--
We have customers who have switched from Linspire to Novell because
Novell offers patent protection with Microsoft. The FSF has been
extremely vocal about v3 limiting these types of deals. I know for a
fact
Qua, 2007-06-06 às 18:50 +0200, Alexander Terekhov escreveu:
More from Carmony:
http://forum.freespire.org/showpost.php?p=63026postcount=35
--
We have customers who have switched from Linspire to Novell because
Novell offers patent protection with Microsoft. The FSF has been
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2191347/gpl3-author-calls-open-source
--
GPL3 co-author Eben Moglen says that open source users must unite in
denying Microsoft's intellectual property claims
Microsoft attempting to 'divide and conquer' open source software
Tom Sanders in California,
http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/osb/?p=156
--
Here We Go Again: Microsoft Inks Deal with Xandros
Posted by Lora Bentley on June 4, 2007 at 4:32 pm
As we pointed out earlier today, News.com says Microsoft has a new
agreement. Whats the big deal? There isnt one, really unless you
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/osb/?p=156
--
Here We Go Again: Microsoft Inks Deal with Xandros
Posted by Lora Bentley on June 4, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Why would any company deliberately defy license terms? Because it can.
Ms. Bentley obviously loves her *own*
http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/12554/1090/
--
is the FSF about to pardon Novell?
By Sam Varghese
Thursday, 31 May 2007
Has the Free Software Foundation, like many others, chosen the path of
least resistance and decided to bend with the wind? A Reuters report
about the
http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN3046168420070531
--
Novell won't be punished for Microsoft deal - source
May 31, 2007
By Jim Finkle
BOSTON (Reuters) - A foundation that owns rights to much of the code
behind Linux software has decided not to carry out threats to punish
Novell
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
The foundation controls rights to a group of programs known as the GNU
operating system, an important part of Linux.
[...]
Er.. Actually I'd rather say The foundation controls rights to the GNU
operating system, of which the Linux
Paolo Gianrossi wrote:
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
The foundation controls rights to a group of programs known as the GNU
operating system, an important part of Linux.
[...]
Er.. Actually I'd rather say The foundation controls rights to the GNU
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/12554/1090/
--
is the FSF about to pardon Novell?
By Sam Varghese
Thursday, 31 May 2007
Has the Free Software Foundation, like many others, chosen the path of
least resistance and decided to bend with the
rjack wrote:
[...]
Yikes!
ACT put the fear of the Lord in Herr Moglen, Stallman and Perens.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2111879,00.asp
Never underestimate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgezxJJa6aU. :-)
http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/12566/1090/
--
GPLv3: the sting
ROFL.
http://gplv3.fsf.org/dd3-faq
--
We attack the Microsoft-Novell deal from two angles. First, in the
fourth paragraph of section 11, the draft says that if you arrange to
provide patent protection to some of the people who get the software
from you, that protection is automatically
http://www.crn.com/software/199800125
-
GPL 3 'Last Call' Draft Issued, Adoption Date Set In June
By Stacy Cowley, CRN
4:53 PM EDT The Free Software Foundation (FSF) issued a last call
draft of the GNU General Public License (GPL) version 3 today, the final
iteration in a two-year drafting
-
China Martens (IDG News Service)
[...]
By incompatible, the FSF means that it sees no legal way to combine code
licensed under GPLv2 with code under GPLv3. Such incompatibility is only
an issue if developers want to link, merge or combine code from programs
licensed under GPLv2 and GPLv3.
Lee Hollaar wrote:
[...]
methods implemented in computer software.
Forward Inline
Original Message
Path: uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: The many ways confusion
Date: Fri, 25 May
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Yeah, and pigs will fly.
Comedian Eben's best stunt this month.
http://news.com.com/Eben+Moglen+predicts+broad+embrace+of+GPL+3/2100-7344_3-6186025.html
--
The GPL has the power to enable open-source software to dethrone
Microsoft from its position of dominance,
rjack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I suspect one reason Eben Moglen is leaving the Free Software
Foundation prior to official adoption of the GPL3 is due to concerns
about it's illegality. A suit against the FSF for the above cited
reasons could have consequences for Moglen's professional
David Kastrup wrote:
rjack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I suspect one reason Eben Moglen is leaving the Free Software
Foundation prior to official adoption of the GPL3 is due to concerns
about it's illegality. A suit against the FSF for the above cited
reasons could have consequences
David Kastrup writes:
An illegal document? Well, I've heard quite a few weird attacks on the
GPL, but this is the first time I see someone suspecting it to be
pornography or similar.
Well, the doofuses at SCO claimed GPLv2 was unconstitutional. The phrase
illegal document doesn't make a
Sonny! Uncle Hasler has spoken!
John Hasler wrote:
David Kastrup writes:
An illegal document? Well, I've heard quite a few weird attacks on the
GPL, but this is the first time I see someone suspecting it to be
pornography or similar.
Well, the doofuses at SCO claimed GPLv2 was
1 - 100 of 331 matches
Mail list logo
