Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:48:33 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in>, Trevor Johnson <trevor@jpj.net> Cc: David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com>, Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010419194439.0444ecc0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20010419185356.M88142@lpt.ens.fr> References: <20010419075750.P5664-100000@blues.jpj.net> <NCBBLIEPOCNJOAEKBEAKIEEFOHAA.davids@webmaster.com> <20010419075750.P5664-100000@blues.jpj.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Trevor Johnson said on Apr 19, 2001 at 08:15:35: > >> Just releasing something under the GPL doesn't give the FSF any say over >> what happens to it. That only happens if the author--or >> authors--transfers the copyright to the FSF (something they do encourage). Not so. The FSF also misleads programmers by stating that the way to place the GPL on their code is to state that it is licensed under Version X "or any future version" of the GPL. So, all the FSF has to do is come out with a new version of the GPL and then make a minor revision to the product, releasing it as the "next" version. Users will flock to the latest version, and the new GPL will apply. This is a very real threat. Recently, the FSF and Bruce Perens have been making noises about modifying the GPL to place onerous requirements on ASP, ISPs, or anyone else who uses GPLed softwre to provide a service. The idea is to "pry" modifications and additions made by service providers out of them, thus depriving them of any advantage they might have in their fields due to in-house software development. These guys really don't want ANYONE to make money from software. --Brett 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?4.3.2.7.2.20010419194439.0444ecc0>