Re: GPL, yet again. (The kernel is a lot like a shared library)
Alexander Terekhov <alexander.terekhov@gmail.com> writes:
> On 9/16/05, Rich Walker <rw@shadow.org.uk> wrote:
>> Alexander Terekhov <alexander.terekhov@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > On 9/14/05, Andrew Suffield <asuffield@debian.org> wrote:
>> > [...]
>> >> As an anarchist I
>> >
>> > You're brainwashed GNUtian.
>>
>> Wow.
>
> Anarchists are anti-copyright and against fake free software.
You *are* aware that anarchism isn't a monolithic block, aren't you.
>
> http://timtyler.org/fake_free_software/
An interesting restatement of the BSD vs GPL argument.
Of course, it relies on an unstated definition of the word "Free".
> At least when it comes to [L]GPL, GNUtians are quite pro-copyright...
> nevermind that they confuse engineering dependencies with copyright
> infringement, don't grok first sale, and happen to believe in Moglens
> "pure copyright license, not a contract" lunacy.
I always thought that the GPL was an interesting hack using the methods
of copyright and contract law to create a public commons that hopefully
could be kept inviolate. Which, funnily enough, is a very anarchist
thing to do (look at housing co-operatives for another example).
cheers, Rich.
--
rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | rw@shadow.org.uk
technical director 251 Liverpool Road |
need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487
www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml
Reply to: