Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:56:38 -0600 From: Joe Warner <rootman@xmission.com> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, "G. Adam Stanislav" <adam@whizkidtech.net>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is Brett Glass to easy on RMS? Message-ID: <01050522095600.00681@blackmirror.xmission.com> In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010505212911.00c3d3a0@localhost> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010505205342.00c3d2a0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010505212911.00c3d3a0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>BSD is free software. GPLed software isn't. ..but this is from a programmers perspective and not just a users, right? It's true that the BSD License gives programmers and businesses more flexibility because they can customize BSD licensed code and, unlike GPL licensed code, don't have to give anything back. However, from a users perspective, I can download GPL licensed software for free and use it to my hearts content. With MS, the default install comes with a very limited amount of useful software and I have to pay through the nose to get the good stuff. All this after paying through the nose for the OS itself. I'm not trying to condone the GPL here but I view the MS "Own the world" motive a bigger threat. Joe On Sat, 05 May 2001, Brett Glass wrote: > At 09:16 PM 5/5/2001, Joe Warner wrote: > > >I hear you but IMO, whether it's BSD or Linux, we're all part of > >the Open Source community > > Actually, Richard Stallman himself says that GPLed software is > NOT open source. (See Dave Winer's essay at > > http://davenet.userland.com/2000/09/15/whatIsOpenSource > > and also RMS' own remarks on the FSF Web site.) And, despite > the hand-waving of ESR and a few others, the GPL actually > violates Point 6 of the Open Source Definition in that it > discriminates -- very much so! -- against a group of > people and a field of endeavor. GPLed software is > not open source. > > >and I think it's high time to bury the > >hatchet. This rings especially true to me after re-reading Craig > >Mundie's speech that condemns aspects of Open Source. I get > >more agitated each time I read it. > > Mundie's speech is irritating to me too, most especially > because it intertwines some very valid points (It's true, > for example, that "give-it-all-away" business models are > foolish) with some obvious falsehoods. But the GPL, and > Stallman's essays on the FSF site, do the same! As Adam > has pointed out, Microsoft and the FSF are two sides of > the same coin. Both are power-hungry and are out to hurt > and to mislead. > > BSD should claim the ethical high ground here. When BSD > says it's free software, it really means it. No nonsense > about "free speech" vs. "free beer," or "keeping" software > free by keeping it away from people who need it. BSD is > free software. GPLed software isn't. > > --Brett > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message -- Joe Warner Daemon News Bringing BSD Together Daemon News E-Zine http://www.daemonnews.org Daily Daemon News http://daily.daemonnews.org/ Print Magazine http://magazine.daemonnews.org/ 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?01050522095600.00681>