Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- INQUIRER: "Torvalds remains unconvinced by GPL3"

[rjack]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=40264

> No major open source distros have yet lined up behind the GPLv3. Sin
> Microsystems has been one of its most vocal supporters so far,
> suggesting that it might choose the licence for its Solaris operating
> system. But it won't make up its mind before the final version of the
> licence has been published. 

That is spelled *Sin* because Sun has been blathering about releasing
Solaris under the GPL since at least April 2004.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/04/30/HNsolarisgpl_1.html

If I could could get as much mileage from my tires as Sun gets from
its bullshit about GPLing Solaris, I would never have to buy new tires 
again. . .

The GPL'd Linux desktop PC is *never* going to suceed. It is vulnerable 
to too many newer technology patents. The Linux server will also 
eventually expire under the GPL, although the older server technology is 
less open to patent threats except for virtualization improvements.

The OpenBSD OS under the BSD license is a far more secure and stable 
server platform than Linux. Old reliable code that is tried and trusted 
is for the most part free of patent threats by now. Old code does not 
mean inferior performance in the context of kernel sevices.

Software patents do not require years of extensive research and 
development investment like drugs or new chemical compounds. If the 
originality requirements for software patents were strengthened and 
limited to three years of protection. Innovation might truly be spurred 
in computer software.

rjack
protection