[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

From: RJack
Subject: Re: Significance of the GP licence.
Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 16:07:37 -0000
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090812)

Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In gnu.misc.discuss RJack <> wrote:

Once the GPL is invalidated, promissory estoppel will allow some proprietary company to improve Linux and turn it into a real
operating system. Microsoft hates the thought that folks will
understand the GPL is unenforceable. That's the reason Microsoft
embraced the GPL -- it suppressed new competition.

Perhaps the Linux kernel will continue to be improved under a free (free as in freedom) license such as BSD or Apache.

You still don't get it, RJ.  The GPL is the most popular free
licence, and that popularity has a reason.

Working on a BSD kernal is so much less popular than working on
Linux. That has a reason, too.

Reason? So do birds. flowers and trees. So what is your point? You are
correct (for once). I don't get it. Statements usually have to make
sense. What's your rhetorical focus?

RJack :)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]