Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd Feb 2007 16:43 UTC, submitted by mwtomlinson
Novell and Ximian The Free Software Foundation is reviewing Novell's right to sell new versions of Linux operating system software after the open-source community criticized Novell for teaming up with Microsoft. "The community of people wants to do anything they can to interfere with this deal and all deals like it. They have every reason to be deeply concerned that this is the beginning of a significant patent aggression by Microsoft," Eben Moglen, the Foundation's general counsel, said on Friday. Update: The FSF claims this is being hyped.
Thread beginning with comment 208896
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: FUD...
by DeadFishMan on Sat 3rd Feb 2007 22:19 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: FUD..."
DeadFishMan
Member since:
2006-01-09

Yes, but Novell never claimed copyrigh of any GPL software, just from the software they made that hapens to use GPL libraries, nothing more.

I'm wondering if you just lack comprehension skills or if you're just poking jabs for fun... If your software uses GPL libraries, it becomes GPL software automatically. Don't want to turn your software GPL? No problem. Just don't use the said libraries. Look elsewhere. There is plenty of LGPL/BSD/MIT /etc-licensed libraries out there that you can use. If you can't find one that suits your needs, you have the option to write one yourself.

But, from the moment that you decide to incorporate GPL code on your product, you have to abide to the upstream license.

Novell is stepping on eggs here because the copyright holder of a large and very important piece of their product is questioning whether they - Novell - have the rights to keep distributing their - FSF - software or not. If it turns out that the MS/Novell deal is indeed breaking the terms of the GPL, the FSF and other copyright holders can and should revoke Novell's rights to keep distributing their software. It is that simple.

I still am not sure if that will be a good thing in the end but Novell should know better what they were doing when they signed that deal.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: FUD...
by dostrowski on Sat 3rd Feb 2007 23:03 in reply to "RE[7]: FUD..."
dostrowski Member since:
2006-11-10

Novell is stepping on eggs here because the copyright holder of a large and very important piece of their product is questioning whether they - Novell - have the rights to keep distributing their - FSF - software or not. If it turns out that the MS/Novell deal is indeed breaking the terms of the GPL, the FSF and other copyright holders can and should revoke Novell's rights to keep distributing their software.

Stallman has already stated that the Novell-Microsoft deal does not violate GPL2, which is, currenctly, what all GNU software and GPL software, for that matter, are licenced under.

Therefore they cannot revoke Novell's right to distribute from that perspective.

I'm not sure how the FSF hopes to accomplish what they're after.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[9]: FUD...
by DeadFishMan on Sat 3rd Feb 2007 23:16 in reply to "RE[8]: FUD..."
DeadFishMan Member since:
2006-01-09

Stallman has already stated that the Novell-Microsoft deal does not violate GPL2, which is, currenctly, what all GNU software and GPL software, for that matter, are licenced under.

Therefore they cannot revoke Novell's right to distribute from that perspective.

I'm not sure how the FSF hopes to accomplish what they're after.


Rest assured that glibc, GCC and the whole toolchain will be licensed under GPLv3 when it finally comes (within 2 or 3 months if I understand correctly) and from that point onwards Novell may find itself in a situation where it will have to stop distributing their Linux distro or pick the source code of the current versions of that software and maintain their own fork (not a small feat by any stretch of the word) and still struggle to keep it compatible with the mainstream version.

And the compiler toolchain is just the tip of the iceberg. There are dozens of smaller but pertinent projects that assign the copyright ownership to the FSF. Not to mention that the Samba Project WILL pull the plug and leave Novell without another critical piece of the puzzle to their enterprise business. Certainly MS could help them on that regard, but whatever comes from such arragement would not be Linux the way we know it nor GPL at all.

I'll have to side with a few posters that stated that *BSD is a much better fit for these corporations in a sense that they can do whatever they want with it without having to worry too much. GPL software just is not suited for that sort of abuse.

Reply Parent Score: 5