Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||
Linux, the GPL, and a new model for software innovation (LinuxDevices)
LinuxDevices.com is carrying a white
paper with a detailed look at the GPL. "This license 'promises'
cannibalization of intellectual property, but does not quite deliver on
this promise, and so has attracted the affection of mammoth electronics
companies (normally IP-protective) who see Linux as their key to the
future. In turn, this most 'anti-IP' of licenses is arguably doing more to
foster innovation than patents or copyrights ever have."
(Log in to post comments)
Linux, the GPL, and a new model for software innovation (LinuxDevices) Posted Aug 28, 2002 18:45 UTC (Wed) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link] Remarkably, after all this time, he's still only partially clued. As might be expected when somebody was totally wrong and announces the fact, when he explains his new understanding there's little more reason to take him seriously than before.From such little details as getting the names of the licenses wrong -- leaving the word GNU out of the title of his paper, and elaborating the LGPL as the "Library" GPL rather than its correct name, the Lesser GPL -- to totally missing the true competitive value of the GPL to businesses, as well as the very simple economic motivation for developers to participate, he still has a lot to learn. If there's anything new or interesting here, I didn't find it. He's articulate, though, and evidently open to reason after he has been pummeled sufficiently, so he might even get it right on the third try. In any case he's no worse than ESR.
An FSF Response to Asay's article Posted Aug 28, 2002 21:51 UTC (Wed) by rao (subscriber, #78) [Link] (posted on behalf of Bradley Kuhn) We at FSF have spent a few minutes reviewing Mr. Asay's paper. We are glad to see that someone who once took a clear anti-GPL stance now claims an "admiration" for it. We noticed the paper contained a number of email quotes from our founder, Richard Stallman, and our General Counsel, Eben Moglen. The quotes appear to be taken from various email conversations that Asay conducted with Moglen and Stallman separately. Quoting email out of context is always tricky, and the conflict and confusion with our official statements regarding the GNU GPL are apparent rather than real. We do, from time to time, have occasion to clarify our views on the GNU GPL, and we work hard to be responsive to questions from the community on them. This does serve to generate a lot of email traffic concerning the Foundation's opinions on GPL, and out of context pieces of the whole of such correspondence can be confusing. When we get pieces together that are particular good and clear, we post them on our philosophy page, as we did with Eben Moglen's essay, Enforcing the GNU GPL, and in our GNU GPL FAQ. As for the GNU GPL, version 3, we had indeed long ago seen Mr. Harris' proposal, but we did not feel it was representative of our plans for next version of the license. The copyright of the so-called draft of GPL Version 3 distributed alongside the article, thus, is incorrectly attributed to the Free Software Foundation. We do not hold copyright on it, nor did we have a hand in drafting it. Efforts for development of real GNU GPL, Version 3 continue within the Foundation. We of course expect to have extensive public discussion before any draft is finalized as the official new version of the license. In March 2002, We approved the Affero GPL, which includes a draft of one major provision we are considering for the next version of the GNU GPL. Of course, when we do announce that a draft copy of actual "GNU GPL, Version 3" is available, it will certainly come directly from the Foundation. Bradley M. Kuhn
|
|||||||||||