Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 31st Aug 2007 19:24 UTC, submitted by Anonymous
The latest issue of the FreeBSD newsletter contains a letter from the Vice President of the FreeBSD Foundation about the GPLv3. "On June 29th, the Free Software Foundation unveiled version 3 of the GNU General Public license. Even though the majority of software included in the FreeBSD distribution is not covered by any version of the GPL, our community cannot ignore this very popular license or its most recent incarnation. Through extremely successful evangelization, and the popularity of Linux, the misconception that OpenSource and the GPL are synonymous has become pervasive."
Thread beginning with comment 267825
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.
Member since:2005-07-06
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2007-02-19
GPL doesn't grant you the right to mention a specific copy of source code, only a copy. Your own copy.
This argument sounds absurd to me.
1. We dont need TiVo example to validate this argument.
2. If we use this argument in other contexts, what it essentially results in is, "GPL type rights cannot be enforced using copyright license terms" (IANAL).
If this is what you have in mind, i have nothing else to say; we have to agree to disagree!