Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Excludes GPLv3 From Linspire Deal
rs232 writes to tell us that Microsoft is excluding any software licensed under the new GPLv3 from their recent patent protection deal with Linspire. "Microsoft has since been treating GPLv3 software as though it were radioactive. 'Microsoft isn't a party to the GPLv3 license and none of its actions are to be misinterpreted as accepting status as a contracting party of GPLv3 or assuming any legal obligations under such license,' the company said in a statement released shortly after GPLv3 was published on June 29. In addition to excluding GPLv3 software from the Linspire deal, Microsoft recently said that it wouldn't distribute any GPLv3 software under its SUSE Linux alliance with Novell, even as it maintains in public statements that the antilawsuit provisions in the license have no legal weight. "
It took over a decade for a lot of major corporation to adjust to Open Source and the GPL as a business model. A lot of this time was finding the right loop-holes in it that would make it work with their business model... With these loopholes both sides won. These company contributed to the Open Source Community as some level and the Company made money. Now a few people who to the most part are anti-capitalistic. decided to change the rules because they see that the a few companies found a hole in the GPL that allowed them to do things not in the Spirit of the original GPL. So they go and change it make it more rigid for corporations and incompatible with their business model. So yes they will block GPL 3 Code and Contribute less to Open Source and Hire Developers to make in house software. (Both Sides loose) Now it may take an other decade for Business to find how to make GPL3 work for them, but in the meantime it is back to priority software. By going to far in one direction you loose more people who are in the middle. The Utopian vision of totally free information and code will never happen, The best you can do is maximize it. GPL 3 in my opinion is trying to force the Utopian vision thus minimizing the use of open coding. I know we all hate Microsoft and all. But can you blame them, they are just starting to kinda sorta maybe just a little bit become open source friendly then the rules change.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
fuck 'em
That probably won't happen. Linus has publically stated that the GPL3 is utter crap. I think that sends a pretty large message to a great many software projects. The linux kernel isn't going to GPL3 anyway...
What makes you say that? That I object to FUD regurdless of the source? Is FUD any less FUD because Comrade Stallman spews it verses Generalissimo Ballmer? Facts are facts: There are a wide variety of true Open Source licenses, that contrary to Stallman et al are perfectly honorable. As well, Stallman is has not yet been declared The One True God, and so people still have the freedom to choose other non-GPL based Open Source licenses (of which there are a number of quite nice ones).
And, as is the correct thing in a free capitalist country such as the USA, we are not obligated by law to follow Comrade Stallman's dictates and choose his One True Open Source License at all. Isn't that what freedom is about? This isn't the world according to Stallman. We can always choose one of the many other Open Source licenses, or even a closed license.
GPL Alturnatives
I have serious issues with the impact of GPLv3 on the use of Open Source in an embedded environment on specialized hardware. But I am very happy to recommend and follow GPLv2.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
QUIT SPREADING THE FUCKING FUD ALREADY!
Name one "hardware design" that the GPLv3 "attempt[s] to control", and I'll concede your point. Otherwise, quit lying!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz