Re: Dangerous precedent being set - possible serious violation of the GPL
On Thu, Dec 02, 1999 at 09:41:30AM -0500, Caspian wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Bruce Perens wrote:
> As much as anything with "commercial" in the name makes me feel saddened
> just to talk about it, something like this clearly needs to be done. Yes.
> This is definitely a good idea. Much as I sometimes wish to lash out at
> the proprietary world by making a license even stricter than the GPL, I
> know that I'd have to go such a route alone. Besides that, it might be
> overreacting...
>
> Perhaps efforts could be made to provide free alternates for all (or at
> least MOST) non-free packages... i.e. Mozilla for Netscape, my proposed
> PiClone/PINE-Clone for pico/PINE, yatadayatadayatada... and of course if
> it had a EULA, it wouldn't restrict the OS to "adults" only, nor would it
> make misleading statements about what copyrights "protect" about the
> dist... :)
The highest priority task I see now is a web-browser deserving its name.
This is neither non-free Netscape nor almost-free Mozilla,
nor free Lynx, w3m, gzilla nor express
It SHOULD NOT try to be free Netscape
It SHOULD try to be free MSIE
Because we should respect all good soft, no matter of their origin.
Also having text-mode browser with capability of scanning many pages
at a time a very big advantagement.
The most commonly included non-free soft in Linux is Netscape.
Then 100%-free povray and at least my computer will be free.
Reply to: