Skip to comments.
SCO updates Unix product, open-source attitude
CNet ^
| 2005-06-23
| Stephen Shankland
Posted on 06/24/2005 11:33:23 AM PDT by N3WBI3
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 last
To: N3WBI3
For stories like this I miss the Eagle :-)
41
posted on
06/24/2005 1:43:54 PM PDT
by
Tribune7
To: Tribune7
there seems to be a replacement..
42
posted on
06/24/2005 1:51:31 PM PDT
by
N3WBI3
(I musta taken a wrong turn at 198.182.159.17)
To: familyop
The LGPL allows for the theft of any of my source that's linked to it You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
43
posted on
06/24/2005 1:57:22 PM PDT
by
ThinkDifferent
(These pretzels are making me thirsty)
To: ThinkDifferent
He uses theft for almost the same reason the RIAA uses piracy, because its inflammatory. In the case of the RIAA its really copyright infringement, not piracy. In the case of the GPL its called RTFM, not theft. People who moan about the GPL being theft always amuse me (especially when in the same thread they admit its political)..
44
posted on
06/24/2005 4:27:44 PM PDT
by
N3WBI3
(I musta taken a wrong turn at 198.182.159.17)
To: familyop
The BSD license contains no such communist virus and does not seek to steal the work of legitimate software businesses. The BSD license even allows businesses to use the associated work as closed source in their own works.Let me get this straight
You like the BSD license because it allows you to steal others work....but you don't like the LGPL because it doesn't??
But it the same time you tell me that the BSD license does not steal???
I am confused here.
45
posted on
06/24/2005 6:01:24 PM PDT
by
amigatec
(There are no significant bugs in our software... Maybe you're not using it properly.- Bill Gates)
To: amigatec
I'll put it this way. Any software developer who sells/distributes his own binaries that are linked with L/GPL'd libraries can be sued. Others who have tried that have already been harrassed by lawyers and legions of Linux socialists. See items 5 and 6 in the copy of the license above. And most libraries with the LGPL do not have a good addendum like that.
I'll release some free code for all, but it will be under the BSD license.
46
posted on
06/24/2005 7:01:36 PM PDT
by
familyop
("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
To: amigatec
47
posted on
06/24/2005 7:07:02 PM PDT
by
familyop
("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
To: familyop
From your link:
It is the first time a court has enforced the GPL, and it illustrates the worldwide jurisdictional risks faced by commercial GPL users.
Hilarious. It's RTFLS ("Read the Friggin' License, Stupid!"). Does anyone grab a copy of Windows Mobile, start hacking it to their needs, and redistribute it without regards to the legalities and possible consequences Windows Mobile license?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson