This sounds too much like an API copyright. Free software licenses protect the implementations, not the interfaces. We'd be very angry at anyone who protected an interface from our implementing it in free software. It has to work the other way, too.
It sounds like the reasons people give for anti-Semitism and other racist sentiment. They stick together and take over, they get into all of the good businesses, and there's nothing left for us. That really means we got complacent, we didn't stay competitive, and we wanted everything to be the same forever. It's unfair that someone comes in and does things better, and we lose out!
You think that you should have a monopoly to make costly software, and anyone who makes less costly or free software is unfairly destroying your livelyhood. That's competition, Brett. If it happens that you lost, you weren't looking while we went by.
I know of three people who think more or less the way you do. One of them can actually program and seems to be a benefit to society sometimes. Two of them consider themselves hackers and bemoan that they are prevented from making a living by RMS and the GNU crowd, but try as I might I can't find any software that they've made. And this is at the same time that my own company is advertising a $100,000/year position for someone to do free software, and will advertise more. I call that making money. In fact, it's difficult to find good free software writers who aren't making something like that already, these days. Brett, how did we leave you behind? Don't you realize that these days, the way to make the most money is writing Linux and Free Software?
It sounds as if you're blaming us for your own failings. I'm sorry, but that's what I see here.
Sorry, wrong vices. I've been to Vegas 7 times and have never dropped a quarter in a slot. I don't drink to excess either. Now, that new ham radio, that's tempting. But I just bought one with my own cash.
Quarter-Million dollar grant. And not grants, only one. Before he got it, he was practically sleeping rough at MIT so that he could promote free software. I can't find fault with the way he put that grant to use, either.
Brett, if you say he's out to deny you a livelyhood fast enough, it might sound to you as if it makes sense, maybe. But I see no logic there at all.
If you don't like the GPL, all you need do is not use GPL code as part of your program. We are not forcing you to use it. You may license your own code any way you like.
I really take issue with your calling RMS unethical. RMS and I can have our arguments, but my experience is that he is among the most ethical people I have ever met and I trust him completely. There is also no questioning his dedication: I promote free software as I can, RMS dedicates his entire life to it.
If we were to compare RMS' achievements with yours, I'm afraid you'd not measure up. Not even in the same order of magnitude. Thus, that you should presume to judge him so harshly seems extremely inappropriate. Frankly, I'm disgusted.
RMS invested his MacArthur money so that it would support him for life as a free software advocate.
Unlike RMS, I am paid a nice salary for a job that happens to include Linux advocacy in its duties. I like that job and want to keep it. In that context, to keep the award seems uncool. Not unethical or dishonest, just uncool. It wouldn't be uncool for RMS, for example, he dedicates his life to free software and his money supports that. Linus has benefitted less than many of us (so far) and has two little kids and can make good use of that $10K, and I would not begrudge him that either. Eric doesn't need money any longer, I'm sure he'd donate the $10K too. So it's not one-upmanship.
But when I saw my name next to that $10K, I was struck with the need to make an immediate statement statement that it would not go into my pocket. I just felt uncool until I got that out.
You are welcome to hold whatever belief you wish in my sincerity.
I'm not counting my chickens before they hatch. But if I got a $10K award, who would I donate it to? At first thought, several organizations come up:
FSF, for general free software development.
SPI, for general free software development.
EFF, for DVD defense.
No-Code International for the continuing battle to institute sensible laws for ham radio licensing, rather than the present system of Morse code exams.
ARRL, another ham radio organization, specificaly their frequency defense fund.
Or someone else? This isn't a vote, though I'm looking for suggestions and rationale.
I think that to use 100 KBPS on GPRS takes the equivalent of 8 voice channels. This service is meant for bursty use, with a lot of people sharing the same data channel per cell, where you download a web page to your little palmtop screen and then you don't touch the net for a while. Sustained use would be very expensive and you'd still have to share the data channel with everybody else in your cell. Don't expect to use this as your regular Internet provider.
A version of the log with the garble edited out is here. Some people were ping-flooding my system so I ended up having to dictate the answers over the phone, and Kevin, who was also moderating the questions at the same time, typed them in to IRC. Some garble resulted.
I hope I get to edit that log, because one or two answers are really garbled. Thinks like "years" becoming "users" and "anarchic" becoming "old-fashioned". For that answer I sound like a recent stroke victim, no kidding. That's because we had technical trouble and I ended up dictating the answer over the phone and Kevin just typed it as fast as he could.
Are you trying to make a point, or just spam slashdot? As far as I know, Linux handles the completely blind user much better than any Microsoft offering since DOS.
I didn't choose it. I chose to grant the interview. I left the technical details up to the interviewer. I am afraid I am quite ignorant of IRC - I don't generally have time to make much use of it.
You sound like a broken record. I have better things to do than play the ascending karma game here. If I wanted karma, I would implement it on technocrat.net .
It's not that he ran the story, but how. If some script kiddie determined that Linux sux, it would not make headlines on Slashdot. This was sort of the same thing. The posting was based on someone who was quite clueless about licensing, with nobody else to balance him. If you read the headline, and if, like most hackers, you didn't know much about licensing, you might have thought there was a real problem. I didn't feel it was responsible reporting.
Robin says we have our differences. I think his feelings are still hurt over the GPL loophole story - after which I threw him about the worst insult you can throw a limo driver. I said his car was yellow:-) . Gosh, I'm such a hothead sometimes.
Of course you don't see that on Slashdot, because a script kiddie doesn't have the expertise necessary to evaluate Linux for the multitude. Software license evaluation requires some expertise, too.
Thanks
Bruce
Re:are contracts/licenses copyrightable?
on
Hole in GNU GPL?
·
· Score: 2
Contracts/licenses are probably not "protectable" by copyright.
There's got to be case law on this, with all of the Board of Realtors copyrighted home sales contract stuff, and the hundreds of companies that make their entire living selling legal boiler-plate. I don't have the time or skill to search it out. Can someone else look into this?
Thanks
Bruce
Re:The postulated "hole" does not exist.
on
Hole in GNU GPL?
·
· Score: 1
The problem is that a corporation is a legal entity and the people working for it are functioning as part of that entity, not really as as separate legal entities. I'd invite you to have an attorney consult on this issue.
Thanks
Bruce
Re:The postulated "hole" does not exist.
on
Hole in GNU GPL?
·
· Score: 3
They are harsh because I'm really pissed off. 99% of programmers don't understand licensing. They don't even want to understand licensing because what lawyers do is emotionaly repugnant to them. So, they count on us to help them with licensing. When something like this, from a completely clueless source, makes the front page of slashdot, they are scared away from a good license and they might end up using something that's really full of holes like the Artistic because they haven't heard anything bad about it lately.
It's probably up to FSF and their law professor to make a GPL FAQ. I talk a bit about licenses in general in my Open Sources article.
I know that Bruce Perens had some thoughts at one point about using rules on public performances to come up with a free license that closed this loophole. I don't know what those thoughts are exactly though, or what came of them
I currently have a yet-to-be-published note on this, which is being evaluated by the principals of a Linux-friendly ASP at the moment.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks
Bruce
You think that you should have a monopoly to make costly software, and anyone who makes less costly or free software is unfairly destroying your livelyhood. That's competition, Brett. If it happens that you lost, you weren't looking while we went by.
I know of three people who think more or less the way you do. One of them can actually program and seems to be a benefit to society sometimes. Two of them consider themselves hackers and bemoan that they are prevented from making a living by RMS and the GNU crowd, but try as I might I can't find any software that they've made. And this is at the same time that my own company is advertising a $100,000/year position for someone to do free software, and will advertise more. I call that making money. In fact, it's difficult to find good free software writers who aren't making something like that already, these days. Brett, how did we leave you behind? Don't you realize that these days, the way to make the most money is writing Linux and Free Software?
It sounds as if you're blaming us for your own failings. I'm sorry, but that's what I see here.
Bruce
Bruce
Brett, if you say he's out to deny you a livelyhood fast enough, it might sound to you as if it makes sense, maybe. But I see no logic there at all.
If you don't like the GPL, all you need do is not use GPL code as part of your program. We are not forcing you to use it. You may license your own code any way you like.
I really take issue with your calling RMS unethical. RMS and I can have our arguments, but my experience is that he is among the most ethical people I have ever met and I trust him completely. There is also no questioning his dedication: I promote free software as I can, RMS dedicates his entire life to it.
If we were to compare RMS' achievements with yours, I'm afraid you'd not measure up. Not even in the same order of magnitude. Thus, that you should presume to judge him so harshly seems extremely inappropriate. Frankly, I'm disgusted.
Bruce
Unlike RMS, I am paid a nice salary for a job that happens to include Linux advocacy in its duties. I like that job and want to keep it. In that context, to keep the award seems uncool. Not unethical or dishonest, just uncool. It wouldn't be uncool for RMS, for example, he dedicates his life to free software and his money supports that. Linus has benefitted less than many of us (so far) and has two little kids and can make good use of that $10K, and I would not begrudge him that either. Eric doesn't need money any longer, I'm sure he'd donate the $10K too. So it's not one-upmanship.
But when I saw my name next to that $10K, I was struck with the need to make an immediate statement statement that it would not go into my pocket. I just felt uncool until I got that out.
You are welcome to hold whatever belief you wish in my sincerity.
Thanks
Bruce
Or someone else? This isn't a vote, though I'm looking for suggestions and rationale.
Thanks
Bruce
Thanks
Bruce
Isn't Chris on his honeymoon now? You might wait a while :-)
Thanks
Bruce
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce
Thanks
Bruce
Since there were technical problems I dictated my replies to Kevin for part of the interview, and it's clear there was some degree of garble.
Thanks
Bruce
Thanks
Bruce
But it's an Open Source copycat :-)
You sound like a broken record. I have better things to do than play the ascending karma game here. If I wanted karma, I would implement it on technocrat.net .
Thanks
Bruce
Nobody else sees the humor in someone reacting to criticism based on the color of their car?
Bruce
With balance. This didn't have balance. Would you expect to see this as a Slashdot feature:
Of course you don't see that on Slashdot, because a script kiddie doesn't have the expertise necessary to evaluate Linux for the multitude. Software license evaluation requires some expertise, too.Thanks
Bruce
There's got to be case law on this, with all of the Board of Realtors copyrighted home sales contract stuff, and the hundreds of companies that make their entire living selling legal boiler-plate. I don't have the time or skill to search it out. Can someone else look into this?
Thanks
Bruce
Thanks
Bruce
It's probably up to FSF and their law professor to make a GPL FAQ. I talk a bit about licenses in general in my Open Sources article.
Thanks
Bruce
I currently have a yet-to-be-published note on this, which is being evaluated by the principals of a Linux-friendly ASP at the moment.
Thanks
Bruce