Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:19:22 -0700 From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> To: <jgrosch@mooseriver.com>, "Frank Pawlak" <fpawlak@execpc.com> Cc: "Bruce Meier" <source@hilo.net>, <freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: FreeBSD and Microsoft Message-ID: <000601c0ffab$08f15ca0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> In-Reply-To: <20010627131125.A52377@mooseriver.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Josef Grosch >Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 1:11 PM >To: Frank Pawlak > Microsoft has >staked a position that the GPL is a virus license thus creating in the >minds of people who do not understand the licensing issues or know much >about Open Source that Linux is a virus or harbors virus. Then they throw Let me point out that Eric Raymond himself used the term "virus" to describe the GPL. Even if Microsoft originated the analogy of virus, the Linux community has not seemed to believe that there is any danger to use of the term. While I think that your correct in that this is an example of Microsoft's physological department defining negative terminology, until the Linux community starts to object to this, we can hardly knock Microsoft for it. >FreeBSD a bone. FreeBSD being the largest of the *BSD and also not using >the GPL. Thus creating hate and discontent in the ranks of the Open Source >community. No, creating hate and discontent in the GPL community. As I've tried to tell people in the past, Open Source DOES NOT equal GPL, or Linux. GPL is just a subset of Open Source. >Remember, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". FreeBSD and >Linux have a great deal in common. And after Microsoft is finished, FreeBSD and Microsoft will have things in common. Does this scare you? We are far better off by sticking >together and collectively telling Microsoft to fuck off. > If we tell Microsoft to not use the BSD license or port their stuff to BSD then we are doing exactly what the GPL license is all about - forcing or views of how source is to be used on others who want to use it. In case you haven't read the BSD license recently, this is completely contrary to what BSD is all about. Further, your objecting to Microsoft bitching about GPL on the grounds that they shouldn't be telling other people what is or is not a good Open Source license to use. Then you turn around and tell us to tell Microsoft what license they should or should not use? I think your dislike of Microsoft has clouded your judgement. What BSD is all about is freedom - and freedom means allowing others to do things they want to do that you may not approve of, no matter how much you dislike it. The collective BSD community has the Moral Authority to tell Microsoft that they are wrong to criticize GPL, but only because we espouse freedom. The second we start telling Microsoft what to do we no longer are espousing freedom, and thus we lose any moral authority we have had to object to their criticizing GPL. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Freedom is worthless unless tested, and this is the biggest test in FreeBSD's history, more significant I believe than the USL/AT&T/UCB trial. Now we will find out if the FreeBSD users that are using FreeBSD really embrace the BSD license values or not. Remember the quote: "I may disagree with what software license you use but I'll defend to the death your right to use it" Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000601c0ffab$08f15ca0$1401a8c0>