Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Nov 2006 23:05 UTC, submitted by SEJeff
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Mark Shuttleworth is trying to entice OpenSUSE developers to join Ubuntu. "Novell's decision to go to great lengths to circumvent the patent framework clearly articulated in the GPL has sent shockwaves through the community. If you are an OpenSUSE developer who is concerned about the long term consequences of this pact, you may be interested in some of the events happening next week as part of the Ubuntu Open Week."
Thread beginning with comment 185361
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Why is proprietary bad?
by tux68 on Sat 25th Nov 2006 19:17 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Why is proprietary bad?"
tux68
Member since:
2006-10-24

"Except the GPL developers work is not being stolen, damaged, or lessened. The GPLed work is still protected in every way as delineated by the GPL v2 license. The nv driver has not been broken due to the offer, nor has the kernel been made inoperable."

That's just your opinion, and not that of all legal minds or even of all developers that choose this license. I'm sure many pirates who steal MS software have many such rationalizations about their deeds too... MS doesn't need the money.. MS is evil anyway.. etc etc..

"Nvidia and ATI believe that the method by which they are making drivers available is within the scope of the GPL and I and many others happen to agree. They are not "contravening" the GPL license they are trying to legally interoperate with it. "

Well they seem to have found a way to work around the GPL, but by many accounts not in the spirit of it. But the question becomes much more murky when someone tries to distribute the combined work; Nvidia and ATI have avoided this issue by not distributing the combined work themselves.

"Saying that NVidia releasing free as in beer drivers for Linux but not releasing the source is no better than someone knowingly stealing commercial software is highly dubious."

To the extent that they are profiting (selling more cards etc) on the backs of developers who do not want them using THEIR software they are every bit as bad as the pirates who profit by using MS software against the license of its owner..

"You are free not to use the drivers but to say that offering drivers is the equivalent to illegal distribution of commercial software? I have no basis for common ground with you and leave you to your opinion."

You miss the very point of my post. Everyone is free to do as they wish, but there are legal and moral guidelines one should follow in making appropriate choices.

Cheers.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Kokopelli Member since:
2005-07-06

"To the extent that they are profiting (selling more cards etc) on the backs of developers who do not want them using THEIR software they are every bit as bad as the pirates who profit by using MS software against the license of its owner.. "

Then let the developers who feel they are being encroached upon take them to court and make them stop. Assuming you have contributed to the kernel you could do it. Your opinion is that the drivers are profiting nvidia. My opinion is that Linux is profiting from the availability of high performance 3d in the form of more users far more than nvidia is profiting from the added sales of users who buy their cards for Linux support. It is a matter of perspective.

Cheers

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[9]: Why is proprietary bad?
by tux68 on Sat 25th Nov 2006 19:29 in reply to "RE[8]: Why is proprietary bad?"
tux68 Member since:
2006-10-24

"Then let the developers who feel they are being encroached upon take them to court and make them stop. Assuming you have contributed to the kernel you could do it. Your opinion is that the drivers are profiting nvidia. My opinion is that Linux is profiting from the availability of high performance 3d in the form of more users far more than nvidia is profiting from the added sales of users who buy their cards for Linux support. It is a matter of perspective."

Just like Microsoft has to take people to court who violate their license.

It's just unfortunate that so many people refuse to respect proprietary and GPL licenses without the threat of the legal system. It would be nice if there weren't so many pirates stealing MS software, and it would be just as nice if there weren't so many people who don't respect the GPL demanding to use GPL software.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Kokopelli Member since:
2005-07-06

"You miss the very point of my post. Everyone is free to do as they wish, but there are legal and moral guidelines one should follow in making appropriate choices. "

There are many who disagree with the fact that the drivers are illegal or immoral. I find the sharing of copyrighted music and movies immoral and illegal. Others do not share this opinion, thus the popularity of P2P and bittorrent. Those who consciously are aware that the sharing of movies and music is against the wishes of the creator and is illegal to do but do so anyway, through whatever excuse, are on morally shaky ground.

A company who makes drivers available but does not make them a requirement for purchase is trying to maximize profit, but are not acting in an underhanded or immoral way IMHO.

Edited 2006-11-25 19:33

Reply Parent Score: 2