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

Re: OT: America's Army



On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 19:37, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 18:02, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> > > Kevin McKinley <ronin2@bellatlantic.net> writes:
> > > 
> > > > On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 16:44:34 -0400
> > > > Bijan Soleymani <bijan@psq.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > When was this? It's pretty much been this way since the late 70s and
> > > > > surely since the 80s. Unix was never free at first. Not until Linux
> > > > > came around and the BSD's became free.
> > > > 
> > > > Au contraire!
> > > > 
> > > > When UNIX was first released it was free as in both freedom and beer.
> > > >
> > > > Then the lawyers got involved. :(
> > > 
> > > It was developped by AT&T. Did they release it as free software, but
> > > then revoke their free license. If so how did they take it back
> > > later. Is it possible to retract a license like that? If they didn't
> > > why did the BSD's have to get rid of all AT&T code.
> > 
> > Well, if the "free license" was written to be revokable, then they
> > could revoke it.  Remember, as much as some people would like to
> > think it, RMS didn't carve the GPL in stone with his finger, so
> > that Moses could carry it down the Mountain...
> 
> "You're free to use this software as long as we feel like it", doesn't
> sound like a Free Software license to me.

Who says it's a Free Software license?  I sure did not...

AT&T created it, AT&T had the right to how, when and under what
conditions to disseminate it.

-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Ron Johnson, Jr.     Home: ron.l.johnson@cox.net          |
| Jefferson, LA  USA   http://members.cox.net/ron.l.johnson |
|                                                           |
| "Oh, great altar of passive entertainment, bestow upon me |
|  thy discordant images at such speed as to render linear  |
|  thought impossible" (Calvin, regarding TV)               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------



Reply to: