From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 6 13:34:58 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F56A106566B for ; Sat, 6 Nov 2010 13:34:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aimass@yabarana.com) Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D19E58FC14 for ; Sat, 6 Nov 2010 13:34:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyb34 with SMTP id 34so1964787wyb.13 for ; Sat, 06 Nov 2010 06:34:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.147.149 with SMTP id l21mr3183990wbv.171.1289050495603; Sat, 06 Nov 2010 06:34:55 -0700 (PDT) Sender: aimass@yabarana.com Received: by 10.227.145.133 with HTTP; Sat, 6 Nov 2010 06:34:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4CD4DD2C.1090407@too1337.com> References: <4CD45A11.7060002@stillbilde.net> <20101105213433.GC8648@guilt.hydra> <4CD4DD2C.1090407@too1337.com> Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 09:34:55 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: OKX5lC-7WCgODfunSEeJag07kmU Message-ID: From: Alejandro Imass To: Steven Susbauer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS License and Future X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2010 13:34:58 -0000 On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Steven Susbauer wrote: > On 11/5/10 5:19 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote: >> [...] > It sounds like he's probably a big fan of the BSD license. I do not see how > this is a bad thing, other than he uses potentially inflammatory words like > "exploit." The basics of what he says are exactly what Red Hat has done from > the beginning, and Apple with OS X. Note he says "take it for nothing," he > is not referring to buying companies but the practice of > including/distributing this software and providing support for the entirety. > Yes, but in practice, it looks like its really about buying companies mostly for their IP and IMHO, in turn sequestering, and to potentially close previously open source software. Of course, communities could potentially fork the already released OSS, but patents and tricky licensing schemes may stop them from doing so. I'm no expert and perhaps is very much speculation but my gut feeling is that companies like Oracle are in a position somewhat like SCO was a while back, trying to compensate their shrinking revenue streams on software sales by suing people.