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

Re: Debian on Lindows ?



On Wednesday 16 January 2002 11:23 pm, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 05:13:11PM -0600, Adam Majer wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:13:55AM -0500, Alec wrote:
> > > Joris, you want to switch to a proprietary platform just to get your
> > > scanner to work?! I understand that Lindows will cost $99 (I'm not sure
> > > what they are going to do about GPL in their code) Firstly, Lindows is
> > > likely to be killed
> >
> > They _have_ to release their code free if they are selling their
> > program... AFAiK, there is no problem if they sell GPL program
> > but they have to allow access to source free.
>
> But which GPL programs will they be using?  If it's a Linux
> distribution that imitates Windows XXXX, then it probably just
> contains the kernel, X and Wine.  Of course, the kernel is GPL'd, but
> I doubt they would need to make any modifications to it.  X and Wine
> are under BSD-ish licenses, so modifications to them do not have to be
> released at all (witness the commercial X servers and Transgamings
> proprietary WineX).
>
> > IMHO, if they don't, Free Software Foundation should sue them for
> > breaking the license - heck, using the stupid Millinium Copyright
> > Act!!! :-0 That would be nice for a change.
>
> The FSF can only get involved in cases where they have copyright; i.e.
> GNU software.
>
> > BUT, on their site it says:
> >
> > "
> >  Lindows.com Licensing Information
> >
> > Lindows.com respects all applicable licensing and is proud to be
> > a strong supporter of the Open Source community by helping to
> > advance several Open Source initiatives. Coming soon to this page
> > will be information, links and resources for obtaining source
> > code and licensing information for any applicable software. "
>
> Again, only for copylefted software, BSD-ish stuff can stay
> proprietary.
>

the way things are with lindows right now, they might even end up changing 
the name to winux--that is if bill doesn't buy their silence for a couple of 
billion. i wouldn't hold my breath on the issue.



Reply to: