Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:33:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:33:13 -0500 Received: from [64.8.50.190] ([64.8.50.190]:7566 "EHLO mta6.adelphia.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:33:11 -0500 Message-ID: <022001c2bd00$777a7940$6a01a8c0@wa1hco> From: "jeff millar" To: "Andre Hedrick" , "Dean McEwan" Cc: , , "Richard Stallman" References: Subject: Re: [OFFTOPIC] RMS and reactions to him (YAWN) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:41:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andre... Who wrote that? It's clear and I can understand it! ;-) jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andre Hedrick" To: "Dean McEwan" Cc: ; ; "Richard Stallman" Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 9:21 AM Subject: Re: [OFFTOPIC] RMS and reactions to him (YAWN) > > Dean, > > Have you ever pondered the question why some of the new code in 2.5 is > coming up with a dual-license of OSL/GPL ? Is it because OSL has some > meaningful terms understood by the courts? Is it because the folks at OSI > understand a bigger picture? > > See I found it worthy enough to go and investigate. > > What I found, I like. > > So if the question was put before everyone to examine the OSL, is this a > better and stronger license to protect the ideas of "free software" ? > > If the conclusions resulted a large positive movement towards OSL and away > from GPL, what do you expect the reponse from RMS would be to the > following: > > Richard, is there a way to make OSL and GPL compatable ? > Richard, will you allow OSL and GPL to coexist ? > Richard, can OSL superceed GPL ? > Richard, can you agree there may be a better license than GPL ? > Richard, if people want to develop under OSL, what are the results > of the combined work? > Richard, if GPL can be improved by the adoption of OSL ideas, > what benefits are there to you idea to holding onto the > past? > > > My concern is that vision and ideas started by RMS, are being clouded. > OSL could have some more bit added to it, requiring the return of the > changes to the original author, or the offending party is required to pay > an alteration royality fee. > > I do not know the what the best answer is today. > > However, I am willing to put my money down (if I ever make any now) to > draft a licenses that empowers the community with a real legal strong hold > to protect its interest of Open Source, and keeping it open. > > I like may other developers have/know/seen their work altered and not > returned, yet without having a license with some teeth based in law > already tried in courts, the personal risk is to great to pursue. > > If I am a bad person for wanting to empower the community with stonger > license than GPL, IMHO is superior to GPL, then I will gladdy be a bad > person. > > What we all hear is one person promoting one agenda with one idea, and the > idea has clouded the vision. If another idea can carry the original > vision further and closer to achieving that of the visionary, why stop > half way down the road ? > > > Regards, > > Andre Hedrick > LAD Storage Consulting Group > > > I have had enough of the mud slinging. > Oh, I think your address should be restored, regardless. > Did you know you can remove GPL from your work, but you can not take back > what is out there now? > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/