Re: GPL V3 and Linux

[Alexander Shishckin <alexander.shishckin@gmail.com>]

On 1/21/06, Chase Venters <chase.venters@clientec.com> wrote:
> On Friday 20 January 2006 20:27, Alexander Shishckin wrote:
> > GPLv3 tends to get on top of the most braindead things ever known to
> > software development. It is, in fact, a one-too-many example of how a
> > person who cannot be seriously considered to be a computer programmer
> > tries to have his one-too-many revenge on companies which employ real
> > software developers and produce real world software. Someone should
> > probably put an end to these miserable efforts.
>
> Why does everyone assume that Stallman is out to 'get revenge' on companies?
> Is his desire for freedom so hard to grasp and believe that all you can do is
> spin it into silly conspiracies?
Ain't that obvoius? Every second word that you read in GPLs is either
'freedom' or 'share' and the rest of the document has absolutely
nothing to do with both, just restricting our *freedom* to *share*.
This is not exactly the way these words are meant to be used.

> Why do people not recognize that his GNU project has built significant things?
> Do you not realize that Linux is licensed GPLv2, which is also Stallman's
> license?
Surely significant things/projects do have their origin there. This is
yet another sad consequence. I hope we can someday get rid of all this
'GNU is ...' crap and build a better world that understands 'freedom'
for what it really is, not just
I'll-sue-you-should-you-use-my-code-in-your-proprietary-product stinky
sort of thing.

> I'm not going to trumpet around in 'patriotic' support of Stallman for too
> long, but if you're going to go on a Stallman/GPL bashing tirade, try having
> some real reasons instead of moaning like a rock in the wind.
He's not a god, nor a prophet, just a human, face it.

> As for the implicit allegation that he's wrong for not accepting the
> "company's" way of doing thing, last I checked, most of this 'free software'
> stuff was started and written by people as a hobby, for themselves and their
> users -- not for companies. It just happens that Stallman's license allows
> business and industry to harmonize.
Not even close. Too much of RMS's bloody 'lectures/prophecies/you-name-it'
can do this to a person. So please be careful.