Slashdot Mirror
Settling SCOres
Israel Pattison writes "The Inquirer is reporting that someone in Germany is claiming to have viewed the SCO-alleged infringing Linux source code without having to sign a NDA. The person gives details about the code that was presented, but the translation-by-software is difficult to follow." The story also includes a link to a human translation; maybe some Slashdot reader can do better. Also in the news is a story about a kernel developer getting uppity with SCO, as well he might.
And us BSDers could give a rat's ass. We're not like a lot (not all) Linux folks, which have a hissy fit if someone violates our license. (Yes, you have to try to violate the BSD license, unlike the GPL license.) We care about code usage, not the license. The more GOOD code is used, closed or not, the better software in general becomes.
/. is not exactly a great example to cite such activities, given the editors can't even freakin email a poor fellow on a DSL line before slashdotting them so their network becomes unusable. (I swear, if any of my investments take off, I'm breaking /. legally for a few days; see how they like it).]
This is generally loss to many GPL advocates. Even many seem lost that Linux has a GPL license, but that doesn't mean that was the only way Linux could have evolved.
The most I've ever seen any BSDer get pissy about are in two general areas: blatant copyright violations and inoperability.
In the first, 2 examples come to mind: (1) when MicroBSD simply took OBSD code and changed the copyright notices with no code improvements; (2) when some GPL ass took BSD driver code and relabeled it and changed the license. Whacked GPLers, OTOH, through a fit if it SEEMS someone is violating the GPL.
[What do I mean by fit? How about taking down folks servers. Then again,
In the second, inoperability of open source code, BSD projects have submitted time and time again code improvements to many supposed open source projects to implement simple fixes so they run better or well on BSD based OSs. But, like US politicans who like their position of authority, many projects are run by Linux centric developers, so trying to get BSD code in takes a ridiculous amount of effort. Hardly that the project developers are worried about bettering their code, they'd rather shut out such improvements, pulling a MS and requiring the project to branch if such improvements would come anywhere near a timely fashion. Key example was Mozilla and OBSD--the code was at hand, implemented, but Mozilla folks just sat at on their asses.
Ports may have come about for a different reason, but now I see how necessary it is, given some folk's position.
If they took BSD code, no suprise. They've done it before. We just don't care really that they have. But when they bash their license with your code against you, the fur flies.