Linux Foundation 2021 annual report

Posted Dec 13, 2021 15:29 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)
In reply to: Linux Foundation 2021 annual report by ldearquer
Parent article: Linux Foundation 2021 annual report

> This came from discussing that open source may allow you to ship closed binaries/devices whereas free software doesn't

The wording here is confusing. This distinction should just be permissive vs copyleft (or reciprocal) licenses.

Linux Foundation 2021 annual report

Posted Dec 13, 2021 17:33 UTC (Mon) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

> This distinction should just be permissive vs copyleft (or reciprocal) licenses.

If free software guys would have been winning then I'm sure an attempt to change the terms would have been made.

Unfortunately they are losing and the only reason free software is around at all is because they are willing to tolerate non-copyleft software and are all too eager to appropriate achievements of open-source camp and [try to] paint them as achievement of free software movement.

Changing the definition is not possible in such an environment: it would expose the true state of affairs.