Slashdot Mirror
Lawsuit Says GPL is a Price-Fixing Scheme
Soko writes "Yes, it's real. The crack team of Daniel Wallace and Maureen O'Gara have ganged up once again to protect their version of "The American Dream," he by filing a lawsuit in Indiana court saying the GPL is nothing more than a price fixing scheme designed to drive software vendors out of business, she by parroting the proprietary vendors' "The GPL kills business" mantra (as well as a few well placed insults at the free software community). I found the story on Groklaw - no links to Ms. O'Gara or Mr. Wallace from me. I'm still kind of dumbfounded at the audacity of Mr. Wallace, but wonder if he has an angle that might have a slim chance of prevailing." This Google search reveals some of Daniel Wallace's views on the GPL.
1. Write free code.
...
2. Open source it.
3.
4. Profit!
sigh
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The truth is that Free Software does destroy business. If your not allowed to own your code, than you can't control the economy based around it.
"They have no value..."
Except that given by the act of creation which open source wants to remove.....
Most people posting on /. in regard to lawsuits brought against MS for bundling IE or their media player were pretty happy someone was going after MS. Now that some idiot is suggesting the same thing against OSS, sanity prevails on /., and people realize how ridiculous such lawsuits are. Of course, if MS was sued tomorrow over bundling, people here would rejoice, because they're not rational enough to keep a consistent opinion, but instead react emotionally based on who is being sued.
Vote for Pedro
Never attribute to malice that which is easily explained by ignorance. Hanlon's Razor, I believe. Maybe I'm ignorant about F/OSS, but I admit it and I'm being open minded about it.
I see quite a few posts in this thread about free (as in cost) software, software with a zero dollar cost - that drives my question (whether right or wrong.)
As for free is in freedom (libre) software, hell I support that (did a presentation today on an application I coded in Java in Eclipse, deployed onto a SuSE 9 server.) My choice. Funny thing is that my company paid about $3,000 for the software (WSAD 5.1.2, box of SuSE plus annual maintenance, etc.)
I'm not against the Libre software movement, but I genuinely believe that the 'gratis' software movement is screwing things up for all of us.
That said - if FOSS isn't about 'gratis' software, maybe we need to start bitchslapping the folks pushing it that direction. If it is about 'gratis' software - someone needs to explain it better than 'well it has been explained ad nausium' or I am going to continue to think it is worse than stupid (it's destructive to software development as a profession.)
Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
Communism on any scale large enough that you can't know everybody's names requires a powerful overhead authority, be it a religious deity or a big brother type governmental authority, to ensure that people do not begin to slack off due to lack of direct reward and punishment for their efforts.
Thus communism easilly leads to totalitarism.
in National Socialism, all infrastructure which is common to the people is nationalized -- so power, water, roads, rail, airline, et etera. health care and schools and junk too I guess.
Then there are small private enterprises -- your bakers, cobblers, tailors and junk.
Citizens are entitled to all public services, but are required in turn to serve the public.
Non citizens get whatever's the leftovers because they don't belong anyway and need to go away.
National Socialism is actually rather nice. Except this pesky "Third Reich" experiment at it went horribly wrong. or did it?
http://vho.org/GB/c/DC/gcgvcole.html
David Cole, a Jew, says the gassings never happened and are fabricated by the Jewish Bolshevick Soviet Union.
True or not, holocaust or not, National Socailism is nice. So long as people stay on their own side of the street. Moochers and parasites must be dealt with, of course. But citizens are rather independent outside of their required service (military).