News Comment This is a comment on news story: Linux Creator Calls GPLv3 Authors 'Hypocrites' As Open Source Debate Turns Nasty It's a reply to comment: We need some cool water... by: bim_bim  GPLv3 is not just simply a reaction to MS/Novell and Tivo. It is to address new forms of threat against Freedom. Tivo's DRM failed in allowing users of GPL code to help their neighbor. It allow you to have the source code but one's ability to modify and study is hampered. Tivoization also has the effect of placing to one entity the sole judgment of what is good or bad for you - the user. Isn't this the reason why we don't want the closed source way of doing things, relying on one organization to decide what is good or bad for you. By what moral grounds does Torvalds allow Tivo to control other people's choice of what is good for them? So too in MS/Novell agreement. An Open Source Developer in their sense is one that can only use their modified/extended code for private use. It even restrict users from distributing their modifications/enhancements, preventing the ability to help their neighbors. There is also the danger of MS insisting on unfounded patents against GNU/Linux causing disruption in the ecology of the community and possibly tainting the code to further their claims. Torvalds really need to take one step backward and read the history of FSF and the purpose it was built. Furthermore, he could just simply stay GPLv2, nobody is forcing him. Herein lies what Stallman have been speaking a long time that Free Software is not equal to Open Source Software. Free Software is about Freedom. While Open Source is simply about accessing the code but fails to insist on Freedom.
Comments: feedback (at) linux.org Advertising: banners (at) linux.org Copyright Linux Online Inc. Compilation ©1994-2008 Linux Online, Inc. All rights reserved.