Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 29th Jun 2007 23:09 UTC, submitted by thebluesgnr
The FSF today released version 3 of the GNU GPL, the popular free software license. "Since we founded the free software movement, over 23 years ago, the free software community has developed thousands of useful programs that respect the user's freedom. The programs are in the GNU/Linux operating system, as well as personal computers, telephones, Internet servers, and more. Most of these programs use the GNU GPL to guarantee every user the freedom to run, study, adapt, improve, and redistribute the program," said Richard Stallman, founder and president of the FSF. This article has some interesting replies from the BSD community (right in the middle).
Thread beginning with comment 252487
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, 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
Member since:
2005-07-07
Actually I'm pretty software neutral. I'll use GPLv2, GPLv3, LGPLv2, LGPLv3 (when it comes), BSD, MIT, Mozilla, Open Watcom and Proprietary stuff and have no problem with any of it because I believe in the seemingly obsolete idea of INDIVIDUAL rights and freedoms concerning software licensing and everything else (this is why I'm also against so called "gun control" laws). I was simply speculating on what the Big Business and Business cartels (like the Business Software Alliance of which IBM, Microsoft and the others who contributed third party code to OS/2 are a part) might do in the face of certain parts of GPLv3 that they may not agree with, particularly the patent and DRM stuff since the cartels and big businesses in question are largely responsible for legalizing and designing of software patents and DRM technology.
As for Richard Stallman it seems to me that the existance of the LGPL and its use in many Free Software Foundation libraries shows that he is a "quiet" supporter of INDIVIDUAL rights in the matter of software licencing despite his philosphical opposition to Proprietary software.