I'd be more worried about the GPL than about Communism. The Chinese government and many companies have long been rather relaxed about copyright and licensing issues. This was one of the major sticking points in Chinas MFN status. If China adopts Linux in a big way, what are they likely to do with the GPL? I'd bet that you'd see Chinese companies take lots of GPL source closed, modify and sell it, without any legal action possible against them. Of course that's not to say that it can't happen anyway. Lots of countries do not recognize Copyright and licenses. But by making Linux "Standard" for China, it is just a lot more likely and will probably include a lot more projects/products.
The differences between GNU and OSI is defined by inclusive freedom verses exclusive freedom.
Inclusive freedom states that as long as we the communite have full and free access to the source code to do with (modify, redistribute) as we will, we don't realy care what anyone else does with it.
Exclusive freedom states that the source code can ONLY be used as fully free and open code, and cannot be used for other purposes (such as a revenue stream).
Both ESR and RMS promote freedom, but it's what else happens besides freedom that is the sticking point.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd be more worried about the GPL than about Communism. The Chinese government and many companies have long been rather relaxed about copyright and licensing issues. This was one of the major sticking points in Chinas MFN status.
If China adopts Linux in a big way, what are they likely to do with the GPL?
I'd bet that you'd see Chinese companies take lots of GPL source closed, modify and sell it, without any legal action possible against them.
Of course that's not to say that it can't happen anyway. Lots of countries do not recognize Copyright and licenses. But by making Linux "Standard" for China, it is just a lot more likely and will probably include a lot more projects/products.
The differences between GNU and OSI is defined by inclusive freedom verses exclusive freedom.
Inclusive freedom states that as long as we the communite have full and free access to the source code to do with (modify, redistribute) as we will, we don't realy care what anyone else does with it.
Exclusive freedom states that the source code can ONLY be used as fully free and open code, and cannot be used for other purposes (such as a revenue stream).
Both ESR and RMS promote freedom, but it's what else happens besides freedom that is the sticking point.