At 03:50 AM 2/16/2002, Patrik Stridvall wrote: >Note that when Wine fully works (close to 100% of all Windows >applications run) it will not matter what license we have, >there will be no money in anything except support anyway >and the LGPL will not hurt that.
WINE is not likely to work more than 90% ever, due to the facts that Windows is a moving target and that Microsoft is likely to patent defensively. >It is the way there that worries me. Note that >we can always choose LGPL later, but after we >have choosen it we can't go back. This is a concern. >> Their place, and purpose, has been stated by Stallman. >> (Not in the licenses themselves, which are designed >> to be deceptive, but in Stallman's words in his more >> candid moments.) It is to turn publicly available >> software into a weapon in his lifelong, personal >> vendetta. Again, he has stated this explicitly >> himself, and it is also well documented by third parties >> such as Levy. > >Please, now you are fear mongering again. No, I am stating historical fact. >I care not whether I support Stallman or not. >I care ONLY about what is good for Wine. Ethics, consumer choice, and the future of programming as a profession all matter as well. It is not ethical to focus only on the interests of one project. >The GPL/LGPL works in ways that are almost the dual to fair use. >Very simplified: It uses copyright to extend fair use. The opposite is true. It attempts to deny fair use by programmers. And GPL V3 will attempt to deny fair use by ASPs. --Brett Glass
