Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux:36666 comp.os.386bsd.questions:2081 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU!werple.apana.org.au!hal9000!monty!newton From: newton@monty.apana.org.au (Mark Newton) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.questions Distribution: world Subject: Re: Summary of Linux vs. 386BSD vs. Commercial Unixes References: <C63spB.BD@ra.nrl.navy.mil> Message-ID: <9304299328@monty.apana.org.au> Organization: APANA South Australia - State mail hub Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 20:47:32 +0930 Lines: 53 eric@tantalus.nrl.navy.mil (Eric Youngdale) writes: > In article <930425471@monty.apana.org.au> newton@monty.apana.org.au (Mark Newton) writes: > >bm@shadow.columbia.edu (Blair MacIntyre) writes: > >> Boy people complain about anything. You charge for software, they say > >> it's too much. You give it to them free, they complain they can't do > >> whatever they damn well please with the source. > > > >Straw-man attack. People are complaining about not being able to do whatever > >they damn well please WITH THEIR OWN PROGRAMS. > > First of all, I am not aware of any programs that have been GPLed by > anyone other than the author. Could you provide a real example?? No one is > forcing anyone to add the GPL to their own program (although some GPL zealots > have been known to undiplomatically request the GPL be added). I think you're missing the point. The BSDites in this thread have been arguing from the standpoint of a person who doesn't use the GPL for there code at all. Therefore, it is fallacious to contend that the GPL is forcing them to do anything at all. My posting was directed against Blair MacIntyre's comments, in which he spoke about software that has been /given/ to the complainers. The complainers haven't been saying anything at all about that; Hence Blair's posting constituted a straw-man attack, or perhaps a non-sequitur. To expand further on the point I made in response to Blair: Copylefting the software that you write involves implicit restrictions upon its distribution. Notably, its distribution is prohibited unless source is provided with it. Basically, whoever distributes the software you write is legally obliged to make it as easy for someone else to obtain as it was for them to obtain. I (and other BSDites) have been arguing against the GPL because I don't want to force those restrictions, or any other restrictions, upon people who choose to distribute /my/ software. I want to make it completely, utterly, totally free. It doesn't matter whether IBM chooses to hijack it, enlarge its size and reduce its speed by factors of twenty and sell it for half a million dollars - I just don't care. While people like Blair MacIntyre continue to confuse the issues at hand by posting irrelevancies, people like you don't have a prayer of understanding these simple concepts. Yours in illumination, - mark -------------------------------------------------------------------- I tried an internal modem, newton@monty.apana.org.au but it hurt when I walked. Mark Newton ----- Voice: +61-8-3224071 --------------- Data: +61-8-3222915 -----