Slashdot Mirror


Torvalds Critiques of GPLv3 and FSF Refuted

j00bar writes "After Linus Torvalds' impassioned critiques of the second draft of GPLv3 and the community process the FSF has organized, Newsforge's Bruce Byfield discovered in conversations with the members of the GPLv3 committees that the committee members disagree; they believe not only has the FSF been responsive to the committees' feedback but also that the second draft includes some modifications in response to Torvalds' earlier criticisms." NewsForge and Slashdot are both owned by OSTG.

6 of 548 comments (clear)

  1. The GPL needs to go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Hello,

    Consulting for several large companies, I'd always done my work on
    Windows. Recently however, a top online investment firm asked us to do
    some work using Linux. The concept of having access to source code was
    very appealing to us, as we'd be able to modify the kernel to meet our
    exacting standards which we're unable to do with Microsoft's products.

    Although we met several technical challenges along the way
    (specifically, Linux's lack of Token Ring support and the fact that we
    were unable to defrag its ext2 file system), all in all the process
    went smoothly. Everyone was very pleased with Linux, and we were
    considering using it for a great deal of future internal projects.

    So you can imagine our suprise when we were informed by a lawyer that
    we would be required to publish our source code for others to use. It
    was brought to our attention that Linux is copyrighted under something
    called the GPL, or the Gnu Protective License. Part of this license
    states that any changes to the kernel are to be made freely available.
    Unfortunately for us, this meant that the great deal of time and money
    we spent "touching up" Linux to work for this investment firm would
    now be available at no cost to our competitors.

    Furthermore, after reviewing this GPL our lawyers advised us that any
    products compiled with GPL'ed tools - such as gcc - would also have to
    its source code released. This was simply unacceptable.

    Although we had planned for no one outside of this company to ever
    use, let alone see the source code, we were now put in a difficult
    position. We could either give away our hard work, or come up with
    another solution. Although it was tought to do, there really was no
    option: We had to rewrite the code, from scratch, for Windows 2000.

    I think the biggest thing keeping Linux from being truly competitive
    with Microsoft is this GPL. Its draconian requirements virtually
    guarentee that no business will ever be able to use it. After my
    experience with Linux, I won't be recommending it to any of my
    associates. I may reconsider if Linux switches its license to
    something a little more fair, such as Microsoft's "Shared Source".
    Until then its attempts to socialize the software market will insure
    it remains only a bit player.

    Thank you for your time.

  2. Re:Sure to happen by packeteer · · Score: -1, Troll

    This may be me going out on a limb but maybe Linus knows he personally will be allowed to tinker no matter what gets implimented. Remember that hes not immune to being corrupted by money too.

    --
    unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  3. Re:I can see both sides by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 0, Troll

    we could eventually face a situation where it is literally impossible to develop FOSS for the latest generation of computers

    Care to explain how this scenario is actually supposed to play out? And does your example require that the hardware makers conspire against OSS?

    I no longer trust the FSF. I know a power play when I see one, and this isn't about freedom and fairness. They want to dictate how people use software. It's no longer about distribution.

    You want a social revolution? Then let it happen, let it play out. If you want to push it forward, go develop something. If you're not a coder, go write or create something and release it under a CC license. The Revolution that the FSF is selling is top down, Stalinist/Leninist. I much prefer Linus's way, which reminds me more of a different Lennon.

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  4. Re:I can see both sides by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 0, Troll

    And you base this fear on what?

    DRM is a boogie man that RMS is using to scare you and get you juiced up.

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  5. Sod what the pope says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    I think the question everyone would like answered is what is Linus' position on masturbation among slashdotters? Don't pretend we can't tell when you're typing with one hand!!!

  6. Re:GNU project non-existent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Fag.