Slashdot Mirror
Xandros CEO Doesn�t Agree Linux is Patent Violator
whitehartstag writes with a link to a Network World article about statements from Xandros in the wake of their Microsoft deal. Xandros CEO Andreas Typaldos made a point of stating that they don't believe their product violates any of Microsoft's patents. Nor, he said, did the software giant share with them exactly which patents they believe Linux violates. Just the same, he's disappointed with the reaction they've received from the open source community. "Feedback from the Linux community has been on the order of 'you shouldn't really be talking to the devil.' Linux and open-source advocates believe it is a big issue and say the Xandros deal, and another signed by Novell with Microsoft last year, erodes open source licensing provisions especially around intellectual property issues. Indeed, the Free Software Foundation is rewriting its GNU General Public License (GPL) 3.0 to prohibit such patent deals in the future."
"The modern software world is pretty much ruled by GCC"
What color is the sky in your world? GCC is a mighty fine thing, but it's not remotely the only (or even the dominant) compiler out there.
"It would be interesting to see what happens when that one's license changes to GPL3."
Why? It won't effect programs compiled by it any more than the current license does. Even in your fantasy-land where GCC is a major player in commercial software development, it going to v3 wouldn't make any difference.
Do you happen to have a reference for that claim? Has anyone from FSF ever publically stated that they have no interest in making the output of GCC covered by the GPL?
Given Stallman and the FSF's recent power-grab with the "anti-tivoisation" language in the GPLv3, why wouldn't they change the license such that anything compiled with GCC is automatically covered by the GPL, as well?