Slashdot Mirror
RMS Condemns "UnitedLinux" per-seat License
dep writes "Likening the practice to Windows, Richard M. Stallman has issued a brief statement condemning the per-seat licensing that it appears will be employed in the "UnitedLinux" core distribution. He calls upon developers to refuse to allow their work to be used by such a distribution."
RMS does not write anything about discouraging developers from allowing UnitedLinux to use their software. He can't. The GPL does not allow that sort of restriction.
UnitedLinux can license seating as they like as a means of revenue. RMS is vocal about his experiences with this sort of licensing and is discouraging users from supporting this endevour under its current licensing.
RMS is a bleeding heart but he fails to be hypocritic.
I'm as mimsy as the next borogove but your mome raths are completely outgrabe.
I've seen Linux people laugh at MS per-seat licensing, yet now that some stupid Linux distributions do the same. Ah it's not such a big deal, RMS is whining for nothing.
What's wrong with you people? If we wanted a Windows clone we would be using Windows, wouldn't we?
Where have the good old days of free Linux, freedom of expression and powerfull shells gone? Nowadays all we hear about is KDE/GNOME, Redhat/Caldera, etc. and their right to charge for Linux.
Enough is enough and its time for a change.
For once, I stand by RMS and by the GPL.
He calls on developers to use the GPL, so as not to offer distributors a target to make proprietary.
What if the developers are the distributors? What if a developer takes an LSB-compliant distribution, writes some code that runs on it (or installs it, or provides package-management services for it) and chooses to keep that code proprietary? What if the developer is called Caldera?
Hmm, maybe in this case the developer wants the distributor (themselves) to have a "target to make proprietary."
Nope, no sig