Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux:35479 comp.os.386bsd.questions:1867 Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.questions Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!hp9000.csc.cuhk.hk!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!uuneo!sugar!peter From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Summary of Linux vs. 386BSD vs. Commercial Unixes Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 17:58:51 GMT Message-ID: <C5wCM5.DDI@sugar.neosoft.com> References: <C5poEp.8Jw@kithrup.com> <C5qCnn.5Kw@sugar.neosoft.com> <D87-MAL.93Apr19230114@byse.nada.kth.se> Lines: 68 In article <D87-MAL.93Apr19230114@byse.nada.kth.se> d87-mal@byse.nada.kth.se (Mats Löfkvist) writes: > In article <C5qCnn.5Kw@sugar.neosoft.com> peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > "Ownership" of intellectual property comes down to the ability to control its > distribution. If the FSF controls the distribution of my code, they own it. > YOU choose to let the FSF control the distribution of your code when you > decide to use FSF tools, code or whatever that makes the GPL to apply to > your code. Bingo. That's why I don't use toolkits and so on that make the GPL apply to my code, and why Bill Jolitz doesn't use GPL code in the 386BSD kernel, and why John Ousterhout doesn't use GPL code in TCL, and so on... for all the various actions that FSF fans have been bemoaning in this thread. You chose to give up ownership of your code to the FSF. That's fine. I choose not to. That's fine, too. So why are you flaming me for it? > What's the problem? Different licenses for different purposes. One to ensure > source availability, another to ensure financial gain. If you don't like one > of them, don't use it. Exactly my point. I coudn't have said it better myself. So why this flame war? Why are you folks dumping on us 386BSD people because we don't like the one you like? That's what's going on here: FSF folks: why don't you use this GPLed code in BSD? BSD folks: we don't want to put BSD under the GPL. FSF folks: why not? BSD folks: (see reasons above) FSF folks: (buncha flaming about evil corporations) BSD folks: hey, it's our work, and we don't mind, why do you mind? FSF folks: (buncha flaming about how the GPL is the best) BSD folks: (explanation about why the GPL isn't right for them) FSF folks: why are you flaming the GPL? BSD folks: huh? Look, folks, we have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use GPL code in our software. We've explained them. If you don't understand, could you at least take your own advice: > What's the problem? Different licenses for different purposes. One to ensure > source availability, another to ensure financial gain. If you don't like one > of them, don't use it. I don't know what the problem is. You tell me. -- Peter da Silva. <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>. `-_-' Har du kramat din varg idag? 'U` My Apple-II has more RAM than my Mac!