Linked by David Adams on Mon 16th Aug 2004 17:44 UTC
I read something in one of the comments for an OSNews posting a couple weeks ago that sent me thinking. It wasn't an original or profound thought. In fact, it's a rather commonly-held opinion that happens to be quite misguided. It's an opinion summed up by the "open source = communist" meme that gets thrown around in thousands of flamewars all over the internet. In this essay, I will explore why this idea is wrong and demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of economics.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
If GCC had really been BCC then there is no way those companies would have contributed their port back to Stallman.
Why not ? Other companies (eg: Apple) contribute back modified BSD-licensed code.
So filling this market need of a free C compiler really exposed a lot of people to the GNU project and it was possible because Stallman wrote GCC instead of using some BCC that may have been available.
You have failed to show any causal link between GCC being GPLed and not BSD-licensed, and people being exposed to open source software.