| 1 |
James <wireless@×××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Etaoin Shrdlu <shrdlu <at> unlimitedmail.org> writes: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>> What you're saying here is not a secret, in fact these are all more or |
| 7 |
>> less well-known facts. Yes, they probably did violate some open source |
| 8 |
>> license. However, I don't see how having had closed source products |
| 9 |
>> would have prevented them from doing what they wanted to do anyway. |
| 10 |
>> And furthermore, what does all this have to do with "making money with |
| 11 |
>> open source"? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I just do not see the harm in letting a small (sub 1 million dollar |
| 15 |
> company) build a product and not provide any details or what they did or |
| 16 |
> how they did it. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Why should they be allowed to gain a profit from something, that the |
| 19 |
FLOSS community made, without giving anything back at all (and if it |
| 20 |
is just source code in an uncommented/undocumented fashion)? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> In the end, their success is more likely related |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Why should somebody care, if they are successful? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> The GPL goes a long way to discouraging/preventing many of the serfs |
| 27 |
> from ever trying.... IMHO. I believe that the GPL is the spawn of satan. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Absolutely disagree. I think the GPL is good the way it is. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> I think the 'serfs' (the greater gentoo community) would be better |
| 32 |
> off with a BSD style license related to Gentoo technologies and |
| 33 |
> still use GPL software, as the individual chooses. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
I don't think so. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Michael |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives