Posted May 23, 2007 5:12 UTC (Wed) by khim
Parent article: A day at the Open Source Business Conference
Is there a reason to single out Google ? As far as I know Google did everything GPL requires it to do. For example when Picasa was "ported" to Linux all patches to WINE were made available. And most of the software is used in-house by Google so according to the FAQ they don't need to release anything (they often do this anyway since it's just easier then to maintain in-house patch) but there are no "pressure for a remedy based on licensing terms"!
Now I'm not sure it's good that GPL allows this kind of behavior, but it just look ridiculous to first allow private modifications and after that complain that patches are not returned back...
to post comments)