Slashdot Mirror


Linux Creator Calls GPLv3 Authors 'Hypocrites'

AlexGr writes "We've heard conflicting tales regarding Linus Torvalds' acceptance of GPLv3. InformationWeek reports on comments by Mr. Torvalds that would seem to decide the issue: 'Torvalds said the authors of a new software license expected to be used by thousands of open source programmers are a bunch of hypocrites ... For Torvalds' part, it appears unlikely he'll ever adopt GPLv3 for the Linux kernel. He accused the Free Software Foundation leadership, which includes eccentric, MIT-trained computing whiz Richard Stallman, of injecting their personal morality into the laws governing open source software with the release of GPLv3. "Only religious fanatics and totalitarian states equate morality with legality," Torvalds wrote.'"

2 of 920 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Fork? by OriginalArlen · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Exactly. Some people say the GPL is evil and viral. This is because they either do not understand it properly, or because they disagree with it. If you are in avour of free software, you can go the GPL route or the BSD route. You writes your code and takes your choice... the GPL is one of the most elegant hacks ever, and having been involved in some legal shenangans on the topic, I can honestly say I've never known anything else that can ruin a lawyer's day quite so effectively. It's a fucking work of art.

    Pardon my language, it's late and I had a long week... (bloody Belgians!!... don't ask.)

    --

    Everything I needed to know about life, I learnt from Blake's Seven
  2. Re:duh by Chibi+Merrow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder if he used vi or emacs to to write that.... /me ducks

    I'm torn between being so happy that someone finally understood and so depressed that it took so many replies and crazy moderations before that happened...

    I can't claim to be an old timer and firsthand familiar with these things, but it seems to me so many young GNU adherents don't understand how much being a hacker already approaches a religion (especially in the negative aspects of organized religion) without someone PURPOSELY trying to espouse religious philosophy. We already have enough heresies, inquisitions, and crusades amongst people who are just trying to get work done or do research... When you start ordaining prophets and messiahs, you're asking for trouble.

    Then again half the people reading what I'm writing are probably equating the word "hacker" with some black hat stealing their credit card numbers and defacing websites...

    --
    Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
    Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them