Novell Won't Lose Right To Sell Linux

BinnyVA writes "You know the story about Novell losing the right to distribute Linux? Well, the Free Software Foundation has absolutely no control over Novell's distribution of Linux. A zealous Reuters reporter apparently conflated the FSF with the open source community in general, took some quotes out of context, and ended up with a sensational headline that fooled a number of people. The Novell deal is completely within the bounds of the GPL, GPLv3 isn't even done yet, and even when it is the Linux kernel is unlikely to be covered by it." Linux.com and Slashdot are both owned by OSTG.

Comments

GPL is'da bomb

[mi]

and even then it would probably be unlikely. I mean, aren't their Linux distros with the Intel 3945ABG driver in them? That's not OSS (not completely anyway).

Drivers are part of the kernel, which is not under GPL.

I think the FSF is probably more interested in keep peoples rights from being abused when it comes to existing OSS applications, or large-scale/severe infractions. I think they aren't an evil organization, they are willing to overlook minor infractions.

It seems rather foolish for serious business to bet the very legality of their major product on the benevolence of some outside organization. They may not be "evil" today, but there is no telling, what kind of zealot may come to the helm 5 years from now.

I'm sorry to repeat this flame-bait, but GPL is a "bomb". Not a "time bomb" (for the explosion is not certain), but a remotely activated one — whether or not you trust the people, who hold the activator, you'd be comfortable without the bomb entirely.

Novell gained a lot of good publicity and good will by getting entangled with Linux. I hope, they'll never regret it, but I think, they should've picked a BSD-licensed OS instead... Applications (like Evolution or Samba) would've been licensed the same way, of course, but, at least, there would've been no problems with the core.

Re:They can distribute linux

[Master of Transhuman]

As somebody pointed out, you can distribute GPLv3 and GPLv2 together. So ninety percent of the distros aren't going to care if the utilities are under GPLv3.

So the ONLY people concerned about the issue will be those that violate GPLv3 - which at the moment is ONLY Novell (supposedly, depending on how the GPLv3 ends up being worded) - and they could probably go to court and prove they didn't violate even GPLv3 - again depending on how that ends up being worded.

What are the FSF fanatics going to do if GPLv3 goes to court and LOSES? Make GPLv4? GPLv5 if that loses?

Nobody else is going to care except some company that MIGHT try to admit patent violations for some reason.

This is bullshit. Nothing is going to happen except that the FSF fanatics are going to be exposed (again) as just that.

And if they become TOO fanatical, they will suddenly find they have no developers working on their utilities - and yes, they will be forked and adopted by those who aren't so fanatical.

GPLv2 has done very well. There may be a need for GPLv3 to avoid some possible problems, but the Novell deal is not a particularly good example.