Count me as 'Energize'
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| swbrown Feb 03, 2007 5:26 AM EDT |
This article is crap. > As written, GPLv3 threatens to fork GNU projects Name a GNU project that's announced it might fork over GPL3, or name an organization that's announced it will fork a GNU project over GPL3. Where's the threat again? > GPLv3 anti-DRM provisions appear to prohibit the (re)distribution of GPLv3 as part of signed images, limiting trusted use of GPL code No. > GPLv3 anti-patent provisions disturb both small technology companies wishing to protect fledgling innovations as well as Fortune 1000 companies with behemoth patent portfolios Those 'Fortune 1000 companies' already have stronger patent retaliation in their OSS licenses (e.g., IBM's CPL). > But I will point out that ideologically pure interpretation of freedom in a shrinkingly small community (or a prison cell) constitutes a Pyrrhic victory for Free Software Were you one forecasting the same fate of the GPL and its ideology 20 years ago? If so, please pause while I laugh at you. |
| dinotrac Feb 03, 2007 6:48 AM EDT |
GPLv3 won't energize anybody or anything. Only an ostrich or an idiot could believe otherwise. For the ostriches among us, look around. Lots of free software activity taking place every single day. The world of free software is already energized. Makes the proprietary world look like a punch-drunk old fighter waking up with a hangover. Much more room for gumming up the works than freeing it up. |
| beirwin Feb 03, 2007 1:07 PM EDT |
I think it's a Good Thing (tm) that the new GPL version addresses a couple threats to software/use freedom - namely the DRM and software patents. The content and software control freaks in cyberspace are relentlessly pushing their agenda of a tightly-controlled Internet. There may not be a "gold rush"-like adoption of the GPL v3, but I think over time people will realize that its provisions will protect them against the aforementioned control freaks and they will switch. I'm glad to have people like Eben Moglen and Richard Stallman on guard for our freedom. |
| swbrown Feb 03, 2007 2:07 PM EDT |
> The world of free software is already energized. And it'd still be going great if it weren't for the TiVoize and Noviolate issues finding holes in GPL2 that require GPL3. With GPL3, it'll be back to business as usual. |
| dinotrac Feb 03, 2007 2:55 PM EDT |
>And it'd still be going great It is still going great. If anything, free software is doing better than ever. Whether or not GPLV3 is a good thing or a bad thing depends on what you value, but it will do exactly nothing to energize free software. People are writing the stuff and using it for more and more things in more and more places all the time. |
| swbrown Feb 03, 2007 5:21 PM EDT |
> It is still going great. If anything, free software is doing better than ever. It's not such a rosy picture in the embedded space. Many have taken the TiVoize path recently, and many more have devices in the works that TiVoize or otherwise attempt to restrict rights you used to be able to exercise with embedded Free Software. GPL3 will fix that, and we'll be back to the way it was. |
| jimf Feb 03, 2007 5:40 PM EDT |
> GPL3 will fix that I suspect that things like TiVo will just continue on under GPLv2, so, how will that 'fix' anything. |
| swbrown Feb 03, 2007 5:58 PM EDT |
> I suspect that things like TiVo will just continue on under GPLv2, so, how will that 'fix' anything. The cost savings come if the community is doing the development for device manufacturers, which it won't be doing on the GPL2 versions of things like the GNU base platform and Samba. The economics that led them here will lead them to GPL3 within a few years. |
| jimf Feb 03, 2007 6:12 PM EDT |
> The cost savings I suspect that the cost savings is somewhat irrelevant for this kind of use. |
| swbrown Feb 04, 2007 1:53 AM EDT |
> I suspect that the cost savings is somewhat irrelevant for this kind of use. There's likely no sector of Free Software use where cost is more relevant than the embedded sector. What makes you think it's not relevant? Device buyers tend not to care (yet :)) what runs their device, the manufacturer will usually have source access or a contracting arrangement with whatever commercial software they're licensing, and the base system tends to not need to be very robust or featureful, so the equation reduces towards cost savings. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!