Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux:37601 comp.os.386bsd.questions:2222 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!think.com!GRAPEVINE.LCS.MIT.EDU!ai-lab!hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu!not-for-mail From: mycroft@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.questions Subject: Re: Summary of Linux vs. 386BSD vs. Commercial Unixes Date: 5 May 1993 21:26:32 -0400 Organization: dis Lines: 28 Message-ID: <1s9pg8$17qj@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu> References: <C63spB.BD@ra.nrl.navy.mil> <9304299328@monty.apana.org.au> <1993May3.093155.10176@cheshire.oxy.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.ai.mit.edu In article <1993May3.093155.10176@cheshire.oxy.edu> opus@cheshire.oxy.edu (David Giller) writes: > > But if they gave it away for FREE, including source, and insured that > noone else charged for it, you'd take issue. Yeah, makes sense to > me. You've still missed the point. The people taking a truly `free' program (remembering that GPL proponents stress the `free' refers to `freedom', not `price'), making some small modification to it, and putting a GPL on it and the changes (and frequently not sending the changes back to the author) are *violating their own principle*; specifically, they are adding more restrictions to an already free program. That is the issue at hand. > You arrogant fool. That's all I can say. You give them the rights > to do anything to your code, INCLUDING RESTRICT IT IN ANY WAY, and > then you get angry and insult them when they do. You're the only person I see who is `angry' and `insult[ing]' people. -- \ / Charles Hannum, mycroft@ai.mit.edu /\ \ PGP public key available on request. MIME, AMS, NextMail accepted. Scheme White heterosexual atheist male (WHAM) pride!