The covenant between Microsoft and Novell is irrelevant, and has no bearing in the discussion, angsts lies in understanding the license under which Linux is governed as an property. Basically it is community property, and belongs to the users as well as its distributors. It is essentially free from control by any individual entity or entities. It's legal standpoint; that if there is any intellectual property that exists in Linux, it belongs to everyone who has the ability to acquire it, and do as they please with it without hindering the ability of anyone else to do as they please also.
Microsoft and Novell's forming an agreement violates the license linux as an OS/Kernel is distributed under any associated software packaged with it. No one legally has the right to form other licenses or agreements in the availability of the software in part or whole to anyone without then violating the license, if they do they lose all right to distribute it, and any contributions they have made to it's code base. Novell cannot legally do this as they accepted the license for Linux when they began developing for it, and purchased the 2nd largest Linux distributor, SuSE of Germany.
Linux does not deny the right of the users (whether commercial or otherwise) to link proprietary software to it's GPL code base to function with certain hardware, software, etc. Yet if Steve Ballmer's general implication that Linux infringes on Microsoft's Intellectual Property in a society based on the rule of law Microsoft must show where the violation has occurred, not brand an accusation, and start claiming guilt for the potential plaintiff. http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archi ves/108806.asp
I can obviously understand the commercial distros backing off the mass marketing of their products in retail stores because of cost v. profit issues. I can respect that Novell purchased SuSE despite my deepest belief that it was a possible bad move when it occurred three years ago, however - what really pisses me off is that Novell actually believes that with the base of developers who created the tools assembled under the Novell/SuSE distro umbrella that they are going to let Novell off the hook just so we can watch the damn wmv files - f--k that!! Keep your damn media file formats as far as I care - I can get my machine to do what the hell I want it to do without Microsoft bullshit installed.
Linux, and GNU software must remain free, I can respect if a piece of open software has to link to a proprietary file if it means adding functionality (i.e. the firmware files needed for the ACX-100 drivers, or USB scanners, etc.) but you don't throw out the baby with the bath water. These tools must remain free to be used, and freely available for distribution. The GPL does not allow for software under it's protection to be distributed with software that is not free for distribution, if it means that that non-distributable software may infringe on the right of the end user to use, analyze, or redistribute if they should chose to do so. Novell, good move to mainstream SuSE, bad move to believe it was yours to do as you please - watch for software to disappear from this distro as developers call on their software's removal due to GPL violations.
I can't wait
As a former small business retailer, I can honestly say that the rebate is not actually for the consumer, it gets passed along to the consumer. The rebates are actually for the retailer to benefit from. Such as if a 15in LCD Monitor costs 299 with a 50 mail in rebate the item costs 149 after rebates.
In actuality the rebate is for the retailer to further benefit from, by selling the item at the price after rebate 249, and getting their additional 50 incentive rebate from the manufacturer. But because the retailers did not want to go through the hassle of managing the rebates or coordinating the customer information they pass the rebate on to the consumer...
Remember Cash Back on purchasing a car does not really help you purchase the car, it is a value that is assigned to the specific vehicle by the manufacturer as an incentive to the car dealer to sell that vehicle, and it gets written back into the value of the car on the close of sale.
eg Car costs 16000
+cash back 1500 (Manu. Rebate)
total 17500 Value of vehicle
-Incentive 1500 Rebate goes to dealer
$16000 Financed with no-down
the money is for the car dealer
and with electronics the rebate is really for the
retailer but passed along to the customer.
Slashdot Mirror
The covenant between Microsoft and Novell is irrelevant, and has no bearing in the discussion, angsts lies in understanding the license under which Linux is governed as an property. Basically it is community property, and belongs to the users as well as its distributors. It is essentially free from control by any individual entity or entities. It's legal standpoint; that if there is any intellectual property that exists in Linux, it belongs to everyone who has the ability to acquire it, and do as they please with it without hindering the ability of anyone else to do as they please also. Microsoft and Novell's forming an agreement violates the license linux as an OS/Kernel is distributed under any associated software packaged with it. No one legally has the right to form other licenses or agreements in the availability of the software in part or whole to anyone without then violating the license, if they do they lose all right to distribute it, and any contributions they have made to it's code base. Novell cannot legally do this as they accepted the license for Linux when they began developing for it, and purchased the 2nd largest Linux distributor, SuSE of Germany. Linux does not deny the right of the users (whether commercial or otherwise) to link proprietary software to it's GPL code base to function with certain hardware, software, etc. Yet if Steve Ballmer's general implication that Linux infringes on Microsoft's Intellectual Property in a society based on the rule of law Microsoft must show where the violation has occurred, not brand an accusation, and start claiming guilt for the potential plaintiff. http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archi ves/108806.asp
I can obviously understand the commercial distros backing off the mass marketing of their products in retail stores because of cost v. profit issues. I can respect that Novell purchased SuSE despite my deepest belief that it was a possible bad move when it occurred three years ago, however - what really pisses me off is that Novell actually believes that with the base of developers who created the tools assembled under the Novell/SuSE distro umbrella that they are going to let Novell off the hook just so we can watch the damn wmv files - f--k that!! Keep your damn media file formats as far as I care - I can get my machine to do what the hell I want it to do without Microsoft bullshit installed. Linux, and GNU software must remain free, I can respect if a piece of open software has to link to a proprietary file if it means adding functionality (i.e. the firmware files needed for the ACX-100 drivers, or USB scanners, etc.) but you don't throw out the baby with the bath water. These tools must remain free to be used, and freely available for distribution. The GPL does not allow for software under it's protection to be distributed with software that is not free for distribution, if it means that that non-distributable software may infringe on the right of the end user to use, analyze, or redistribute if they should chose to do so. Novell, good move to mainstream SuSE, bad move to believe it was yours to do as you please - watch for software to disappear from this distro as developers call on their software's removal due to GPL violations. I can't wait
As a former small business retailer, I can honestly say that the rebate is not actually for the consumer, it gets passed along to the consumer. The rebates are actually for the retailer to benefit from. Such as if a 15in LCD Monitor costs 299 with a 50 mail in rebate the item costs 149 after rebates. In actuality the rebate is for the retailer to further benefit from, by selling the item at the price after rebate 249, and getting their additional 50 incentive rebate from the manufacturer. But because the retailers did not want to go through the hassle of managing the rebates or coordinating the customer information they pass the rebate on to the consumer... Remember Cash Back on purchasing a car does not really help you purchase the car, it is a value that is assigned to the specific vehicle by the manufacturer as an incentive to the car dealer to sell that vehicle, and it gets written back into the value of the car on the close of sale. eg Car costs 16000 +cash back 1500 (Manu. Rebate) total 17500 Value of vehicle -Incentive 1500 Rebate goes to dealer $16000 Financed with no-down the money is for the car dealer and with electronics the rebate is really for the retailer but passed along to the customer.