Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd Feb 2007 16:43 UTC, submitted by mwtomlinson
Permalink for comment 208880
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/15/13 23:03 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-02-15
The FSF made a mistake. Moglen clearly left the Reuters reporter with the impression he intended to leave: that FSF was going to "do something about Novell." He is back pedalling now because he has realized that the only thing that the FSF could do would be to revoke Novell's license, which would be very counterproductive.
Why would it be counterproductive? Because if FSF revoked Novell's license to the software that the FSF owns it would make it clear to all but the most rabid fanboys that the GPL is just another revokable license and doesn't guarentee any "freedoms" at all.
More than that, it would cause companies like IBM and HP, who have invested large amounts of money into Linux to question the wisdom or relying on the few Linux components that the FSF controls. IBM, after all, has been in the compiler business for fifty years, and would have no problem at all replicating GCC.