GPL tested in Court 5093
GPL tested in Court 5095
I've actually discussed the GPL with an intellectual property attorney, and his opinion was very enlightening...
I can't see why he picked IBM, Novell and Redhat, none of them own Linux, they are contributers and aid distribution, but none would really claim to own the GPL system.
But at the same time when you think about it they could be a case, because everyone in GPL Has fixed a price and being such a low price it does interfere with or inhibit the launch of compebreastion.
It does in fact do the oposite to what we want, we want people with the skills to develop and inspire the computing world, whether that be on Linux or not, to take us all forward. But if our pricing prevents that then arn't we doing the very thing that MS is seen as doing, inhibiting innovation and development?
GPL tested in Court 5096
BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2006-05-17, BearItAll spake thusly: Hi bear; I don't believe I have ever heard any...
Do we really want to be the Only OS out there? Lets say that in 20 years time MS is no more, just a few hobbyists left sending virus's to each other just for old times sake and saying things to each other such as "Hey do you remember the extra long coffee breaks we used to get each week when the NT server would crash", but Linux is everywhere, no chance of anything new because who could afford to challenge a system that can be gotten for free. I don't think we really would want that.
But goodness knows what we could do about it other than suggest that the new OS writers release their OS on GPL and look for some other way to earn a living. (I just heard someone say 'Why not!', well, get real, even developers have to eat, mainly Mars bars, but at 28pence each you need an income to support that).
GPL tested in Court 5094
on May 17 2006 6:48 pm Erik the semantic arsehole This is clbuttic fuddie at work, mixing abuse into the response. I have seperated the abuse out...