| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Recommendation: no GPLv3 for SolarisRecommendation: no GPLv3 for SolarisPosted Feb 10, 2007 23:10 UTC (Sat) by b3timmons (guest, #40286)In reply to: Recommendation: no GPLv3 for Solaris by Nelson Parent article: Recommendation: no GPLv3 for Solaris
That's not FUD, that's not press, that's just a fact, if you play ball with Linux you will never be cut off from your code. Except in some scenarios involving Tivoization and MS-Novell type of patent agreements. I would expect these scenarios to be on the rise over time.
(Log in to post comments)
Recommendation: no GPLv3 for Solaris Posted Feb 11, 2007 8:04 UTC (Sun) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Yes.
Right now people are saying that Microsoft is extracting licensing money from people that are using Linux as long as they promise not redistribute Linux. They are doing this 'under the table'.
Think about that for a second. Microsoft is using patent fud to:
|
|
||||||||||||