From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S261857AbTAIHyx>; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 02:54:53 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S261872AbTAIHyw>; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 02:54:52 -0500
Received: from fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com ([66.185.86.72]:14882
	"EHLO fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com") by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id <S261857AbTAIHyw>; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 02:54:52 -0500
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: "Dimitrie O. Paun" <dpaun@rogers.com>
Reply-To: dpaun@rogers.com
Organization: DSSD Software Inc.
To: rms@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently"
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 01:44:35 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3
Cc: lm@bitmover.com, acahalan@cs.uml.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <200301050802.h0582u4214558@saturn.cs.uml.edu> <200301071118.41059.dpaun@rogers.com> <E18WX6e-0001Xj-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <E18WX6e-0001Xj-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Message-Id: <200301090144.35808.dpaun@rogers.com>
X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.103.156.204] using ID <dpaun@rogers.com> at Thu, 9 Jan 2003 03:02:44 -0500
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On January 9, 2003 02:28 am, Richard Stallman wrote:
> These discussions will never convince those people, but they do win
> support from others who read both sides and find that we have right on
> our side.  So we have something to gain.

I have not touched upon the principle side of things on purpose:
what I'm trying to say is that it does not matter how's right or wrong.

Yes, you can say your campain gains people on the GNU/Linux side, and
you are correct -- it would in any case, it's just the law of large
numbers. You can view that as a gain, and I don't dispute that, but
that gain comes at a huge price: you greatly erode your credibility
and stature within the community. You can use your influence within 
the community in ways that would server the FSF a _lot_ more effectively.

Yes, you will say, but we are _right_. Well, you might be. But the
world is not a fair place, and sometimes you have to accept that.
There is unfairness all over the place: you take credit for other
people's work by putting under the GNU umbrella a lot of stuff you
did not write. That's unfair. Is it fair that Alexandre Julliard,
the Wine (http://www.winehq.org) project leader is listed in a list
together with 200+ other developers that contributed a tiny fraction
of what Alexandre did? No, it's not. There are endless examples of
these in the free software world. Once can not simply state the names
and importance (and _how_ would you gauge *that*?) of every single
contributor when you refer to the system.

And because people like a simple mnemonic, they chose one: Linux.
You would have liked they pick the acronym you invented, but they
didn't. People have chosen. It's a tiny detail in the grand scheme
of things, let's be all happy that a catchy acronym was invented
and addopted, and move on!

-- 
Dimi.