Slashdot Mirror
FSF's Opinion of the Apple Public Source License
Stian Engen writes "Bradley Kuhn of the FSF does not recommend the release of new software using the Apple Public Source License (APSL) 2.0 despite its
newly accuired Free Software License."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
*cough* bullshit! *cough*
The GPL is viral exactly because the FSF is about building a power base for a political movement. Changes, like taking away the right of the FSF to alter the GPL _AS THEY SEE FIT_ - and applying those changes to previously GPL'ed code - would remove some of their power.
It's not about "free" anything. It's about Socialism, to use one of the kinder labels available.
do you honestly think charging somebody MONEY for your services/products is bad?
No, I don't. At the same time, I don't think it's wrong for people to be able to write software and give it away for free.
What Apple's trying to do is to 'appear' to be free, and make money off other's work (gratis). If Apple wants to hire some programmers, pay them money, they needen't even give the code under APSL, proprietary licensing would do. Why all this subterfuge about Open Sourcing a Freedom anyway?
Better a straight-forward Communist than a dubious devious Capitalist.
-
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Excuse me if I don't take a single thing FSF says to heart.
These guys can find fault with anything but the 'blessed GPL'. They're the ones that give free software the 'commie' name because of their inflexibility.
I should think that any company that releases the core of their operating system as a open source of *any* kind with no monetary cost associated with it is impressive.
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.