This is just bullshit. The GPL provides a way to get paid for the distribution. (See part 1 of the GNU General Public License). You just pass those rights on to someone else. If you wanted, you could charge $150,000 "for the physical act of transferring a copy".
You don't *have* to distribute it over the internet. You just can't stop anyone else from doing so. And what would I care, if I made my money on just one copy?
The GNU GPL pushes innovation--you want to eat? Keep you ass moving! Much better than coming up with something 50 years ago and rehashing it so I can sit on my ass and watch it earn money.
If you're opposed to the GPL, you just a lazy bastard freeloader on society. Get up and work for a living!
1. Start a company that makes shitty software for microcomputers
2. Slip some secret code into the Linux kernel (via a collaboration with IBM)
3. Sue IBM
4. ???
5. Profit!!!!
And you know, in Soviet Russia, the dotbomb business plans come to you!
Slashdot Mirror
This is just bullshit. The GPL provides a way to get paid for the distribution. (See part 1 of the GNU General Public License). You just pass those rights on to someone else. If you wanted, you could charge $150,000 "for the physical act of transferring a copy".
You don't *have* to distribute it over the internet. You just can't stop anyone else from doing so. And what would I care, if I made my money on just one copy?
The GNU GPL pushes innovation--you want to eat? Keep you ass moving! Much better than coming up with something 50 years ago and rehashing it so I can sit on my ass and watch it earn money.
If you're opposed to the GPL, you just a lazy bastard freeloader on society. Get up and work for a living!
1. Start a company that makes shitty software for microcomputers 2. Slip some secret code into the Linux kernel (via a collaboration with IBM) 3. Sue IBM 4. ??? 5. Profit!!!! And you know, in Soviet Russia, the dotbomb business plans come to you!