| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
A new source of anti-GPL FUDA new source of anti-GPL FUDPosted Nov 23, 2003 20:30 UTC (Sun) by ccchips (subscriber, #3222)In reply to: A new source of anti-GPL FUD by rev Parent article: A new source of anti-GPL FUD You know what? Think Netscape -> Internet Explorer. It's worth pointing out that both of these were being distributed under a clearly non-free license at the time. The dirrerence was that Microsoft decided to "cut off" Netscape by distributing the tool free-of-charge to *everyone*, whereas Netscape had some requirements for corporate users to pay, and hoped that home users would pay once they decided they liked Netscape (indefinite evaluation period.) What I can't understand myself; why anyone with any sense pays attention to some of these lawyers' idiocy. As far as using the GPL to get back at a former employer, I agree that it's not all that formidable of a weapon. All the employer needs to do is to start releasing and distributing modified versions of the employee's program, and then offer better services andd value-added products (maybe in binary-only form, for a fee,) that compliment the GPL's product.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||