Red Hat has an NDA cooperation with Marvell for the wireless chips that they want to use for the One Laptop per Child-project. The idea of this is that both parties think Marvell will be more open in the future, but this is absolutely not the path they should walk, according to OpenBSD's Theo de Raadt. "I am getting really tired of 'open source' people who work against the open source community. Our little group can probably take credit for having 'opened up' more wireless devices than the rest of the community, and therefore we feel we have a better grasp of the damage OLPC has done here."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-10-22
@Moulinneuf
Public domain is not a license !
Th Mona Lisa is public domain, Mozart and Bach are public domain, Shakespeare is public domain.
Public domain means it belongs to everyone and is free to use for any purpose because no one owns it, and no one can licence it.
BSD is not shared source, it's open. There is just a difference of philosophies between GPL and BSD licences.
GPL original is free forever, modified also free.
BSD original is free forever, modified might be free or might not be, could even go GPL.
Name callins is uncalled fore
Member since:2006-03-12
Well f--k me, damn is a swear word now? What in the hell?!? Hell is too? Well, I'll be a damned. Shit, you need to lighten up there buddy. Last I checked foul language, even by your prudish standards, didn't invalidate a statement.
Perhaps you need to read what the public domain is, it is the end of all claims on a property. When something enters the public domain it is no longer owned by anyone, all rights are granted to anyone who may wish to make use of it. This isn't a licence, this is the end of licensability - noone can restrict that stuff any more.
You really must be on some sort of narcotic Moulinneuf, since you are unable to understand English, open means open, it doesn't mean perpetually open, it just means open. It's a simple word, perhaps you should look it up before talking about how things that are able to be closed aren't open. I don't call my door a shared door, I say it's an open door.
Their is no need to be so religiously dense Moulinneuf, if you stopped drinking the magick water then maybe you would be able to grasp how imbecilic it appears when you go around trying to make new definitions for words.
Edited 2006-10-06 16:31
Member since:
2006-03-12
Are you high son? Damned near any licence listed on the OSI's site makes sure the software remains open, hell, even the public domain, which is to say no licence, the granting of all rights absolutely, makes sure that the software remains open.
People making a closed source derivative of something does not remove the original software, how hard is that to understand? So many GPL fanbois seem to completely ignore this.
The GPL is one of many licences which force all derivative software of the original to be open, it isn't even alone in what you meant to say.
Edited 2006-10-05 23:12