Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 10:42:24 -0500 (CDT) From: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@americantv.com> To: brett@lariat.org, chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Market share and platform support Message-ID: <199909091542.KAA27568@free.pcs> In-Reply-To: <local.mail.freebsd-chat/19990909103127$0200@fish.pcs> References: <local.mail.freebsd-chat/4.2.0.58.19990909032923.045a1da0@localhost> <local.mail.freebsd-chat/000001befaaa$e6b4b760$021d85d1@youwant.to>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <local.mail.freebsd-chat/19990909103127$0200@fish.pcs> you write: >At 03:05 AM 9/9/99 -0700, David Schwartz wrote: >> But I really don't see what you think WC can do to hurt >FreeBSD. Whatever >>they did, what would stop all those people who felt it was bad from >>continuing the development of FreeBSD in some other direction on their own? >>In other words, what more could they do than stop helping? > >Let's suppose, just for the sake of argument, that some key files in the >FreeBSD distributions -- just a few -- began to require a license from >Walnut Creek if they were included on a disk that was sold for money. Let's _NOT_ suppose that. It's just plain stupid. You seem to forget that Jordan is not the sole custodian of FreeBSD. Such a license would absolutely never be able to enter the CVS tree, the global committer community would never allow it. But, humoring you, and engaging in "reducto ad absurdium", what would prevent Linus Torvalds from changing a few key files (which he wrote, and presumably still holds a copyright on) to contain a similar license? I think you're seeing monsters under the bed here. -- Jonathan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199909091542.KAA27568>