|
Joe Barr, from Linux.com, clarifies some uncertainty over Novell's (in)ability to distribute future versions of Linux. 1. The FSF has absolutely no control over Novell's distribution of Linux. None...Zero. It doesn't matter a whit how much Stallman hates the Microsoft/Novell deal. It's legal...legit...in full compliance with the GPL.
2. GPLv3 is still on the drawing board. Jumping to conclusions about the consequences of its impact on Novell is insanely irresponsible. Any changes to the current draft version of GPLv3 will go through the same public debate and discussion as have the previous drafts.
3. The odds of the Linux kernel ever moving to GPLv3 -- so long as its current anti-DRM and other restrictive clauses remain in place -- is about the same as mine being crowned Miss America. Judging by Barr's tone, he's a bit frustrated with the lack of awareness by some journalists who have covered the Microsoft-Novell deal, and consequently spread what he regards simply as "misinformation." I don't believe Barr has any special affinity for Microsoft, or its partnering with Novell; he's just saying that if you're going to criticize either, then do it right.
Barr also makes a good point about free software and open source, as the terms are often mishandled in reference to the Microsoft-Novell situation: "conflating the open source and Free Software communities...shows about as much familiarity with the subject matter as I have with quantum physics." Yup.
Although free software, open source software, hybird-dual licensing and proprietary licensing can be understood as falling along a spectrum, its by no means a steady spectrum. Open source groups often find more in common with IP firms than with the free software crowd; and free software representatives, such as Stallman and Moglen, consistently find themselves as much at odds with open source firms as with IP firms.
posted by Noel Le @ 3:38 PM | Free Culture Movement
Link to this Entry |
Printer-Friendly |
Email a Comment | Post a Comment(0)
|
