Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

[Hyman Rosen]

amicus_curious wrote:
> Of late, the only resistance offered was by Verizon who were freely
> given a dismissal with predjudice which, in effect, is a license to
> distribute the busy box code without bothering with the source
> distribution although I am sure they don't care to do so anyway.

The company which manufactures the routers, Actiontec, distributes
the GPLed sources. Verizon provides a gateway to Actiontec for
firmware upgrades.

> You would have to connect up your statement as to how ludicrous
> "casual users" could be and why.

You stated "The Busy Box stuff seems to be a[n]... effort to get
casual users to pay" thereby characterizing the plaintiffs, which
have included router manufacturers, as "casual users". A router
manufacturer is not a casual user, so I characterized your
characterization as ludicrous. Shall I illustrate my understanding
of "ad hominem" by calling you ludicrous as well?

> The objective of the open source 
> community is to get everyone using the same thing and periodically 
> improving on it in order to make progress.

The FSF is not a member of the "open source" community. It is a
member of the "free software" community. Its objectives are for
users of programs to have the freedom to run, read, change, and
share them.

> Denying someone the opportunity to make progress

Equally, those who refuse to share are also denying others the
opportunity to make progress. So are those who demand money. It's
a free market, and creators get to set the terms under which their
creations may be used. Anyone who wants to be more generous to
those who do not want to be generous in turn is free to use another
license. Those who have chosen the GPL have already stated their terms.