Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 12th Nov 2006 22:48 UTC, submitted by nedvis
Internet & Networking "The Samba Team disapproves strongly of the actions taken by Novell on November 2nd. One of the fundamental differences between the proprietary software world and the free software world is that the proprietary software world divides users by forcing them to agree to coercive licensing agreements which restrict their rights to share with each other, whereas the free software world encourages users to unite and share the benefits of the software. The patent agreement struck between Novell and Microsoft is a divisive agreement. It deals with users and creators of free software differently depending on their 'commercial' versus 'non-commercial' status, and deals with them differently depending on whether they obtained their free software directly from Novell or from someone else. The goals of the Free Software community and the GNU GPL allow for no such distinctions."
Permalink for comment 181609
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: That's only the first..
by hackus on Mon 13th Nov 2006 03:03 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: That's only the first.."
hackus
Member since:
2006-06-28

"Switching the linux kernel to GPLv3 (assuming you can get *all* the copyright holders to agree) changes nothing. Changing every single GPL'd package in existence to GPLv3 still changes nothing.

Finally, after the debacle involving Kororaa a few months back, the last group that should be talking about licenses that divides users by forcing them to agree to coercive licensing agreements which restrict their rights to share with each other is the Free Software Community. "

I disagree.

I think you are also taking this out of context.

First of all, if you want to have absolute freedom, please, pick a BSD style license.

That way, you can help turn the computing industry into a free slave labor market for the corporate types.

FSF advocates A TYPE of freedom, not freedom from everything, also known as chaos. So saying that FSF is somehow subversive is a twisted and sick perspective.

The FSF specifically prevents many things, which I won't recant here as anyone can read about them in the current GPL v2 license.

However, what V3 protects you against is the freedom to subvert the V2 license. Which essentially is what V3 of the GNU Public license is.

Specifically, you are restricted from preventing people appropriating your work, without contribution back into the community of GPL copyright holders, through the use of encryption or DRM submarine schemes.

Make no doubt. The powers that be have taken notice about this thing called GNU Software, and they want it dead in the worst kind of way. They have all sorts of subversive tactics planned one is under way at Novell, right at this very instant.

Like it or not, if the community doesn't move to support GNU v3 as is, or something very close to it, you will quickly find lots of GNU software to run on ZERO new hardware.

They, the enemy, the closed source community, the corporate software manufacturers who believe they actually invent software and only THEY have the right to produce software, WILL obtain their goals, as long as people like YOU exist.

-Hack

Reply Parent Score: 5