Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 7th Nov 2017 11:50 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes

Andrew S. Tanenbaum, creator of MINIX, has published an open letter to Intel regarding Intel's use of MINIX in the IME:

The only thing that would have been nice is that after the project had been finished and the chip deployed, that someone from Intel would have told me, just as a courtesy, that MINIX 3 was now probably the most widely used operating system in the world on x86 computers. That certainly wasn't required in any way, but I think it would have been polite to give me a heads up, that's all.

If nothing else, this bit of news reaffirms my view that the Berkeley license provides the maximum amount of freedom to potential users. If they want to publicize what they have done, fine. By all means, do so. If there are good reasons not to release the modified code, that's fine with me, too.

I can still barely believe this whole story.

Thread beginning with comment 650648
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: freedom
by ssokolow on Tue 7th Nov 2017 16:00 UTC in reply to "RE: freedom"
Member since:

Your use of the word "infect" makes it clear that you've bought into Microsoft's old "viral license" smear campaign.

It makes more sense to say that the GPL is a "hereditary license". Projects "inherit" the license from their ancestors and dependencies they choose. It doesn't magically go out and "infect" unsuspecting passers-by.

If you don't want to GPL your project, don't use GPLed code ...and don't whine because you think you're entitled to use my code without "living up to the terms of the contract" I offer. It would have been at least as easy for me to go the All Rights Reserved route.

Edited 2017-11-07 16:02 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 12

RE[3]: freedom
by tylerdurden on Tue 7th Nov 2017 16:24 in reply to "RE[2]: freedom"
tylerdurden Member since:

Yeah, it's fascinating how that talking point (the infection) has gotten such high mileage. Especially since the license refers to code, there's nothing in the GPL forbidding you to make your own code and release it under your own license, it's just that you have to provide the GPLd code you got elsewhere.

Reply Parent Score: 6