| |||||||||||||
IFOSSLR is a Free Speech zone but many positions expressed in it are to benefit GPL violators.IFOSSLR is a Free Speech zone but many positions expressed in it are to benefit GPL violators.Posted Jun 16, 2012 21:54 UTC (Sat) by jtc (subscriber, #6246)In reply to: IFOSSLR is a Free Speech zone but many positions expressed in it are to benefit GPL violators. by bkuhn Parent article: IFOSSLR 4.1 available
'I've read nearly all the articles IFOSSLR has ever published, and those about copyleft are generally variations on one theme: "How to I make use of copyleft software without sharing the software that I write."'
(I assume "How to" should be "How do".) Anti-free-software, to me, would be to be against the principles of FOSS to the extent that that such a person/organization would try to rid the world of such software and principles (impossible, of course), or would at least wish it would go away. The above ("How do I make use...without sharing..." [and, I assume, "without paying for it") sounds to me more like simple parasitism - i.e., wanting to exploit FOSS rather than wanting to get rid of it. Sure - Not a very helpful POV, but not anti-, IMO.
(Log in to post comments)
IFOSSLR is a Free Speech zone but many positions expressed in it are to benefit GPL violators. Posted Jun 17, 2012 9:31 UTC (Sun) by armijn (subscriber, #3653) [Link]
I'd like to encourage anyone to actually read the articles and judge for themselves (pun intended).
IFOSSLR is a Free Speech zone but many positions expressed in it are to benefit GPL violators. Posted Jun 19, 2012 0:02 UTC (Tue) by bkuhn (subscriber, #58642) [Link] I agree with Armijn on that point. Folks should read the articles for themselves and decide for themselves if they feel they're biased. My main worry is that uninformed folks (and there are likely no uninformed folks reading LWN, actually) might thing IFOSSLR represents a full spectrum of views. It doesn't.
IFOSSLR is a Free Speech zone but many positions expressed in it are to benefit GPL violators. Posted Jun 19, 2012 0:01 UTC (Tue) by bkuhn (subscriber, #58642) [Link] I realize that not many people agree with me, but I believe that creating more proprietary software works against Free Software. That's why I believe most lawyers working in the field are having a negative impact: because they seek to help their clients maximize how much they can keep proprietary. I realize fully that most people don't think proprietary software is bad for society. Most of my points are predicated on that as an assumption. Obviously, if you disagree with my assumptions, you'll disagree with my conclusions. I think debate of that assumption is healthy, but it's somewhat off the point I was trying to make in this context. If you think proprietary software is a good (or, at worst, a neutral thing) for society, you might not find issue with any IFOSSLR article.
|
|||||||||||||