[News] Another Win for GPLv3 - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Another Win for GPLv3 - Linux ; Document manager picks new open licence ,----[ Quote ] | Daniel Chalef, KnowledgeTree's chief operating officer, praised the GPLv3 as | modern, well-structured and a significant achievement for the Free Software | Foundation (FSF). `---- http://www.tectonic.co.za/view.php?src=rss&id=1837 Press release: KnowledgeTree Announces ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

  1. [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Document manager picks new open licence

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Daniel Chalef, KnowledgeTree's chief operating officer, praised the GPLv3 as
    | modern, well-structured and a significant achievement for the Free Software
    | Foundation (FSF).
    `----

    http://www.tectonic.co.za/view.php?src=rss&id=1837

    Press release:

    KnowledgeTree Announces Adoption of GPLv3

    http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/94527/index.html


    Related:

    GPL Project Watch List for Week of 10/19/07

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | The GPL v3 Watch List is intended to give you a snapshot of the GPLv3/LGPLv3
    | adoption for October 13th through October 19th, 2007. ¬*
    |
    | October World Series
    |
    | As of October 19th, 1pm PST, our database contained 898 GPL v3 projects, as
    | compared to last weeks number on October 12th of 833 GPL v3 projects. This is ¬*
    | a larger than average increase of 65 GPL v3 projects which puts us on the
    | brink of 900 GPL v3 projects and closer to the important milestone of 1000
    | GPL v3 projects. ¬*
    `----

    http://gpl3.blogspot.com/2007/10/gpl...r-week-of.html


    GPLv3 adoption on track, experts say

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | In the end, for the FSF, the measure of the GPLv3's success will be, not how
    | widely it used, but whether it can protect software freedom. "What does
    | success mean?" Brown asks. "I think it's important not to set some arbitrary
    | target about what success means. It's not a numbers game. It's about how do
    | you get people to value the aims of GPLv3. Because if you don't value the
    | freedoms of the GPL, then the question of GPLing isn't about freedom. It's a
    | question of technical considerations." ¬* ¬* ¬*
    `----

    http://www.linux.com/feature/119880


    GPLv3: past the 5K mark, and going strong

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | 1. Or later ‚Äď 4708 of 9082 projected ‚Äď 52%
    | 2. LGPLv3 ‚Äď 30 of 723 projected ‚Äď 4%
    | 3. GPLv3 ‚Äď 5100 of 13078 projected ‚Äď 39%
    | 4. GPL, not converted ‚Äď 5086 projected (GPL projects times (100% - 72%
    | ¬* ¬*convert rate))
    | 5. Non GPL license ‚Äď 3722 projected (Active projects ‚Äď (Active GPL projects +
    | ¬* ¬*not converted))
    |
    | All this in one month.
    |
    |
    | So, what is the summary?
    |
    | Adoption and projects released under GPLv3 are as expected. The part that is
    | often overlooked is the long standing impact of the "or later" clause,
    | initially put into effect more than a decade ago as part of the language
    | surrounding the GPLv2 License, or later, at the time and now, common among
    | GPL licensed projects. This clause in effect guaranteed a wide
    | spread "potential" of adoption of the license the day it was released. ¬* ¬*
    `----

    http://gpl3.blogspot.com/2007/08/gpl...ng-strong.html


    Redmond On The Ropes

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | You have my apology. It was necessary to use language in the following
    | article that I don't usually use...in print. In private, a twenty-year Marine
    | couldn't compete with me...but here, where kids come...you have my apology. ¬*
    `----

    http://blog.lobby4linux.com/index.ph...The-Ropes.html


    GPLv3 report: 30% increase with Sugar on top

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Of course, if you add in those projects licensed as "GPL v2 or LGPL v2.1 or
    | later," then the total swells to 2,990. Not bad.
    `----

    http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13505_1-9...bj=TheOpenRoad


    GPL3 to dominate LinuxWorld

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Bui-Friday believes that many companies will move to the new licence but only
    | at a timely juncture. “It’s very rare that a software project will go through
    | the trouble and expense of cutting a new version just for a new licence.
    | Typically, what we’ve heard is that the next version they cut they will go
    | [with GPL3],‚ÄĚ she said. ¬* ¬*
    `----

    http://www.vnunet.com/itweek/news/21...ate-linuxworld


    Signal and Noise in GPLv3

    ,----[ Quote
    | In an email to me last month, Linus Torvalds, who has been portrayed in the
    | media as GPLv3's main opponent, describes the language that he and other use
    | on the Linux kernel mailing list as "blunt, to the point, and not very
    | polite." When journalists quote pieces of it, he notes, often "the context of
    | that language is then lost entirely" -- and he adds that "it's not just the
    | text of the thread itself that is the context; the context is also how
    | technical people discussing things amongst each other is in itself a very
    | different context than a trade magazine article." ¬* ¬* ¬*
    `----

    http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/article.php/3692201


    Misleading InformationWeek GPLv3 article

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Linus's position is clear. He's repeatedly said that he'd use GPLv3 in
    | certain situations if there was a practical advantage, but he prefers v2 over
    | v3. That's fine. I prefer v3, but v2 is still a great licence. ¬*
    `----

    http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/..._gplv3_article


    Why does Microsoft seem scared of GPLv3?

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Microsoft is extremely keen to avoid "legal debate" over whether its recent
    | partnerships with Linux firms such as Novell, Xandros, and Linspire, mean
    | Redmond must assume any of the new licenses' legal obligations. ¬*
    `----

    http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/softwar...9279673,00.htm


    Microsoft disses GPLv3 (and rocketman Kirk)

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | This is Thursday's IT Blogwatch: in which Microsoft squirms out of GPLv3's
    | clutches, perhaps. ¬*
    `----

    http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/5823


    The Badger Game

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | So, by threatening everything and promising nothing (because would Microsoft
    | really sue anyone for patents, knowing how many competitors in the Linux
    | community have patents of their own?), Microsoft has skillfully managed to
    | get open source players to endorse Open XML. A variant of the classic Badger
    | Game if I ever heard one. ¬* ¬*
    |
    | Faced with cons like this, I am beginning to realize that having something
    | like the GPLv3 around is a very good idea. Even though the new GPL could not
    | have prevented this scam, it may help in the future. ¬*
    `----

    http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastruc...71302826OPMSPB

  2. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    < snip >

    > GPLv3 adoption on track, experts say
    >
    > ,----[ Quote ]
    > | In the end, for the FSF, the measure of the GPLv3's success will be, not
    > | how widely it used, but whether it can protect software freedom. "What
    > | does success mean?" Brown asks. "I think it's important not to set some
    > | arbitrary target about what success means. It's not a numbers game. It's
    > | about how do you get people to value the aims of GPLv3. Because if you
    > | don't value the freedoms of the GPL, then the question of GPLing isn't
    > | about freedom. It's a question of technical considerations."
    > `----
    >
    > http://www.linux.com/feature/119880


    /quote
    From its survey of 380 developers, Evans Data concluded that "only" 6% of
    developers working on FOSS have adopted GPLv3. Even more seriously, it
    claimed that two-thirds of those surveyed did not plan to adopt GPLv3 in
    the next year, and 43% would never switch. The company said that "almost
    twice as many would be less likely to join a project that implements GPLv3
    than would be more likely to join," although without giving exact figures
    in the announcement of the results.
    /unquote


    You can weasel word all you want: If 43% of developers say they would
    *never* use GPL3, and twice as many would be lesss likely to join a GPL3
    project than the number who would, it simply indicates that GPL3 is a
    gigantic failure. As it rightfully should be. It is idiotic, it is wrong
    and it mingles things which should never have to do anything with a
    *licence*

    In short: It should be scrapped
    --
    Hardware, n.:
    The parts of a computer system that can be kicked.


  3. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Thursday 25 October 2007 08:48 : \____

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    > < snip >
    >
    >> GPLv3 adoption on track, experts say
    >>
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >> | In the end, for the FSF, the measure of the GPLv3's success will be, not
    >> | how widely it used, but whether it can protect software freedom. "What
    >> | does success mean?" Brown asks. "I think it's important not to set some
    >> | arbitrary target about what success means. It's not a numbers game. It's
    >> | about how do you get people to value the aims of GPLv3. Because if you
    >> | don't value the freedoms of the GPL, then the question of GPLing isn't
    >> | about freedom. It's a question of technical considerations."
    >> `----
    >>
    >> http://www.linux.com/feature/119880

    >
    > /quote
    > From its survey of 380 developers, Evans Data concluded that "only" 6% of
    > developers working on FOSS have adopted GPLv3. Even more seriously, it
    > claimed that two-thirds of those surveyed did not plan to adopt GPLv3 in
    > the next year, and 43% would never switch. The company said that "almost
    > twice as many would be less likely to join a project that implements GPLv3
    > than would be more likely to join," although without giving exact figures
    > in the announcement of the results.
    > /unquote
    >
    >
    > You can weasel word all you want: If 43% of developers say they would
    > *never* use GPL3, and twice as many would be lesss likely to join a GPL3
    > project than the number who would, it simply indicates that GPL3 is a
    > gigantic failure. As it rightfully should be. It is idiotic, it is wrong
    > and it mingles things which should never have to do anything with a
    > *licence*
    >
    > In short: It should be scrapped


    I provided about 10 references. You selected one of them and then quote-mined
    the article for one survey (among several others, some positive) which reveals
    a negative picture. You know, Microsoft funded some GPLv3 surveys too and got
    busted. It wasn't surprising to see the outcome of these surveys.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Mandriva & Fedora - Gotta love them girls
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine

  4. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Peter KŲhlmann wrote:

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> ____/ Peter KŲhlmann on Thursday 25 October 2007 08:48 : \____
    >>
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>
    >>> < snip >
    >>>
    >>>> GPLv3 adoption on track, experts say
    >>>>
    >>>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>>> | In the end, for the FSF, the measure of the GPLv3's success will be,
    >>>> | not how widely it used, but whether it can protect software freedom.
    >>>> | "What does success mean?" Brown asks. "I think it's important not to
    >>>> | set some arbitrary target about what success means. It's not a
    >>>> | numbers game. It's about how do you get people to value the aims of
    >>>> | GPLv3. Because if you don't value the freedoms of the GPL, then the
    >>>> | question of GPLing isn't about freedom. It's a question of technical
    >>>> | considerations."
    >>>> `----
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.linux.com/feature/119880
    >>>
    >>> /quote
    >>> From its survey of 380 developers, Evans Data concluded that "only" 6%
    >>> of developers working on FOSS have adopted GPLv3. Even more seriously,
    >>> it claimed that two-thirds of those surveyed did not plan to adopt GPLv3
    >>> in the next year, and 43% would never switch. The company said that
    >>> "almost twice as many would be less likely to join a project that
    >>> implements GPLv3 than would be more likely to join," although without
    >>> giving exact figures in the announcement of the results.
    >>> /unquote
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> You can weasel word all you want: If 43% of developers say they would
    >>> *never* use GPL3, and twice as many would be lesss likely to join a GPL3
    >>> project than the number who would, it simply indicates that GPL3 is a
    >>> gigantic failure. As it rightfully should be. It is idiotic, it is wrong
    >>> and it mingles things which should never have to do anything with a
    >>> *licence*
    >>>
    >>> In short: It should be scrapped

    >>
    >> I provided about 10 references. You selected one of them and then
    >> quote-mined the article for one survey (among several others, some
    >> positive) which reveals a negative picture. You know, Microsoft funded
    >> some GPLv3 surveys too and got busted. It wasn't surprising to see the
    >> outcome of these surveys.
    >>

    >
    > In short: You select the ones you like. And then disregard those you don't
    > like because they contradict your GPL3-cult.
    > Why am I not surprised?


    No. Your problem is your dumbness in insisting no one
    should use GPL3 because the sky would fall down.
    It didn't.
    Now Get over it.
    Plenty of projects are adopting GPL3.
    So will I.




  5. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    7 wrote:

    > Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Thursday 25 October 2007 08:48 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> < snip >
    >>>>
    >>>>> GPLv3 adoption on track, experts say
    >>>>>
    >>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>>>> | In the end, for the FSF, the measure of the GPLv3's success will be,
    >>>>> | not how widely it used, but whether it can protect software freedom.
    >>>>> | "What does success mean?" Brown asks. "I think it's important not to
    >>>>> | set some arbitrary target about what success means. It's not a
    >>>>> | numbers game. It's about how do you get people to value the aims of
    >>>>> | GPLv3. Because if you don't value the freedoms of the GPL, then the
    >>>>> | question of GPLing isn't about freedom. It's a question of technical
    >>>>> | considerations."
    >>>>> `----
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://www.linux.com/feature/119880
    >>>>
    >>>> /quote
    >>>> From its survey of 380 developers, Evans Data concluded that "only" 6%
    >>>> of developers working on FOSS have adopted GPLv3. Even more seriously,
    >>>> it claimed that two-thirds of those surveyed did not plan to adopt
    >>>> GPLv3 in the next year, and 43% would never switch. The company said
    >>>> that "almost twice as many would be less likely to join a project that
    >>>> implements GPLv3 than would be more likely to join," although without
    >>>> giving exact figures in the announcement of the results.
    >>>> /unquote
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> You can weasel word all you want: If 43% of developers say they would
    >>>> *never* use GPL3, and twice as many would be lesss likely to join a
    >>>> GPL3 project than the number who would, it simply indicates that GPL3
    >>>> is a gigantic failure. As it rightfully should be. It is idiotic, it is
    >>>> wrong and it mingles things which should never have to do anything with
    >>>> a *licence*
    >>>>
    >>>> In short: It should be scrapped
    >>>
    >>> I provided about 10 references. You selected one of them and then
    >>> quote-mined the article for one survey (among several others, some
    >>> positive) which reveals a negative picture. You know, Microsoft funded
    >>> some GPLv3 surveys too and got busted. It wasn't surprising to see the
    >>> outcome of these surveys.
    >>>

    >>
    >> In short: You select the ones you like. And then disregard those you
    >> don't like because they contradict your GPL3-cult.
    >> Why am I not surprised?

    >
    > No. Your problem is your dumbness in insisting no one
    > should use GPL3 because the sky would fall down.
    > It didn't.
    > Now Get over it.
    > Plenty of projects are adopting GPL3.
    > So will I.


    Fine. I will *never*
    Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later" clause.
    Not ever
    --
    Linux is simply a fad that has been generated by the media


  6. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Peter KŲhlmann espoused:
    > 7 wrote:
    >
    >> Peter KŲhlmann wrote:
    >>
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> ____/ Peter KŲhlmann on Thursday 25 October 2007 08:48 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> < snip >
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> GPLv3 adoption on track, experts say
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>>>>> | In the end, for the FSF, the measure of the GPLv3's success will be,
    >>>>>> | not how widely it used, but whether it can protect software freedom.
    >>>>>> | "What does success mean?" Brown asks. "I think it's important not to
    >>>>>> | set some arbitrary target about what success means. It's not a
    >>>>>> | numbers game. It's about how do you get people to value the aims of
    >>>>>> | GPLv3. Because if you don't value the freedoms of the GPL, then the
    >>>>>> | question of GPLing isn't about freedom. It's a question of technical
    >>>>>> | considerations."
    >>>>>> `----
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> http://www.linux.com/feature/119880
    >>>>>
    >>>>> /quote
    >>>>> From its survey of 380 developers, Evans Data concluded that "only" 6%
    >>>>> of developers working on FOSS have adopted GPLv3. Even more seriously,
    >>>>> it claimed that two-thirds of those surveyed did not plan to adopt
    >>>>> GPLv3 in the next year, and 43% would never switch. The company said
    >>>>> that "almost twice as many would be less likely to join a project that
    >>>>> implements GPLv3 than would be more likely to join," although without
    >>>>> giving exact figures in the announcement of the results.
    >>>>> /unquote
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You can weasel word all you want: If 43% of developers say they would
    >>>>> *never* use GPL3, and twice as many would be lesss likely to join a
    >>>>> GPL3 project than the number who would, it simply indicates that GPL3
    >>>>> is a gigantic failure. As it rightfully should be. It is idiotic, it is
    >>>>> wrong and it mingles things which should never have to do anything with
    >>>>> a *licence*
    >>>>>
    >>>>> In short: It should be scrapped
    >>>>
    >>>> I provided about 10 references. You selected one of them and then
    >>>> quote-mined the article for one survey (among several others, some
    >>>> positive) which reveals a negative picture. You know, Microsoft funded
    >>>> some GPLv3 surveys too and got busted. It wasn't surprising to see the
    >>>> outcome of these surveys.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> In short: You select the ones you like. And then disregard those you
    >>> don't like because they contradict your GPL3-cult.
    >>> Why am I not surprised?

    >>
    >> No. Your problem is your dumbness in insisting no one
    >> should use GPL3 because the sky would fall down.
    >> It didn't.
    >> Now Get over it.
    >> Plenty of projects are adopting GPL3.
    >> So will I.

    >
    > Fine. I will *never*
    > Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later" clause.
    > Not ever


    Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  7. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Mark Kent wrote:

    > Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    >> 7 wrote:
    >>
    >>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:


    < snip >

    >>>>> I provided about 10 references. You selected one of them and then
    >>>>> quote-mined the article for one survey (among several others, some
    >>>>> positive) which reveals a negative picture. You know, Microsoft funded
    >>>>> some GPLv3 surveys too and got busted. It wasn't surprising to see the
    >>>>> outcome of these surveys.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> In short: You select the ones you like. And then disregard those you
    >>>> don't like because they contradict your GPL3-cult.
    >>>> Why am I not surprised?
    >>>
    >>> No. Your problem is your dumbness in insisting no one
    >>> should use GPL3 because the sky would fall down.
    >>> It didn't.
    >>> Now Get over it.
    >>> Plenty of projects are adopting GPL3.
    >>> So will I.

    >>
    >> Fine. I will *never*
    >> Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later" clause.
    >> Not ever

    >
    > Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!
    >


    What is wrong with "GPL2 only"?
    --
    We are Linux. Resistance is measured in Ohms.


  8. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Mark Kent wrote:

    >Peter KŲhlmann espoused:
    >>
    >> Fine. I will *never*
    >> Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later" clause.
    >> Not ever

    >
    >Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!


    Like Linus?


  9. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    ____/ chrisv on Friday 26 October 2007 21:10 : \____

    > Mark Kent wrote:
    >
    >>Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    >>>
    >>> Fine. I will *never*
    >>> Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later" clause.
    >>> Not ever

    >>
    >>Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!

    >
    > Like Linus?


    Linus needs to wake up too.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | "I feed my 3 penguins with electricity and love"
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine

  10. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ chrisv on Friday 26 October 2007 21:10 : \____
    >
    >> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>
    >>>Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    >>>>
    >>>> Fine. I will *never*
    >>>> Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later" clause.
    >>>> Not ever
    >>>
    >>>Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!

    >>
    >> Like Linus?

    >
    > Linus needs to wake up too.
    >


    Certainly. After all, the GPL3-cult is right. Even when its wrong
    --
    Another name for a Windows tutorial is crash course


  11. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Saturday 27 October 2007 00:06 : \____

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> ____/ chrisv on Friday 26 October 2007 21:10 : \____
    >>
    >>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Fine. I will *never*
    >>>>> Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later" clause.
    >>>>> Not ever
    >>>>
    >>>>Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!
    >>>
    >>> Like Linus?

    >>
    >> Linus needs to wake up too.
    >>

    >
    > Certainly. After all, the GPL3-cult is right. Even when its wrong


    It's not about DRM or TiVo. Linus, by his own admission, concentrates on
    technical things and is not entirely aware of the 'politics' outside it all.
    The matter of fact that without the GPLv3's protection (e.g. against patents),
    the kernel will be hurt and subverted. Hasn't he already seen the
    unsubstantiated claims coming from Microsoft and accusing the kernel
    of 'infringing'?

    He called security expert "insane" a couple of weeks ago, but does he care
    enough to know that the whole system around him was made "insane" to knock him
    out of the market? FWIW, Alax Cox appears to be supporting GPLv3.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Windows leaves me peckish
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Swap: 1510068k total, 388824k used, 1121244k free, 39796k cached
    http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms

  12. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Saturday 27 October 2007 00:06 : \____
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> ____/ chrisv on Friday 26 October 2007 21:10 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Fine. I will *never*
    >>>>>> Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later"
    >>>>>> clause. Not ever
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!
    >>>>
    >>>> Like Linus?
    >>>
    >>> Linus needs to wake up too.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Certainly. After all, the GPL3-cult is right. Even when its wrong

    >
    > It's not about DRM or TiVo. Linus, by his own admission, concentrates on
    > technical things and is not entirely aware of the 'politics' outside it
    > all. The matter of fact that without the GPLv3's protection (e.g. against
    > patents), the kernel will be hurt and subverted. Hasn't he already seen
    > the unsubstantiated claims coming from Microsoft and accusing the kernel
    > of 'infringing'?
    >
    > He called security expert "insane" a couple of weeks ago, but does he care
    > enough to know that the whole system around him was made "insane" to knock
    > him out of the market? FWIW, Alax Cox appears to be supporting GPLv3.
    >


    More unsupported idiocy regarding GPL3

    Face it, Roy, *everythng you GPL3-cultists so far have asserted about GPL3
    is just simply bull****. I am simply not dumb enough to buy that balderdash
    --
    Law of Probable Dispersal:
    Whatever it is that hits the fan will not be evenly distributed.


  13. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Peter KŲhlmann espoused:
    > Mark Kent wrote:
    >
    >> Peter KŲhlmann espoused:
    >>> 7 wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Peter KŲhlmann wrote:

    >
    >< snip >
    >
    >>>>>> I provided about 10 references. You selected one of them and then
    >>>>>> quote-mined the article for one survey (among several others, some
    >>>>>> positive) which reveals a negative picture. You know, Microsoft funded
    >>>>>> some GPLv3 surveys too and got busted. It wasn't surprising to see the
    >>>>>> outcome of these surveys.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> In short: You select the ones you like. And then disregard those you
    >>>>> don't like because they contradict your GPL3-cult.
    >>>>> Why am I not surprised?
    >>>>
    >>>> No. Your problem is your dumbness in insisting no one
    >>>> should use GPL3 because the sky would fall down.
    >>>> It didn't.
    >>>> Now Get over it.
    >>>> Plenty of projects are adopting GPL3.
    >>>> So will I.
    >>>
    >>> Fine. I will *never*
    >>> Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later" clause.
    >>> Not ever

    >>
    >> Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!
    >>

    >
    > What is wrong with "GPL2 only"?


    When you see how the patent game plays out, you will see.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  14. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Mark Kent wrote:

    > Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    >> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>
    >>> Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    >>>> 7 wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    >>
    >>< snip >
    >>
    >>>>>>> I provided about 10 references. You selected one of them and then
    >>>>>>> quote-mined the article for one survey (among several others, some
    >>>>>>> positive) which reveals a negative picture. You know, Microsoft
    >>>>>>> funded some GPLv3 surveys too and got busted. It wasn't surprising
    >>>>>>> to see the outcome of these surveys.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> In short: You select the ones you like. And then disregard those you
    >>>>>> don't like because they contradict your GPL3-cult.
    >>>>>> Why am I not surprised?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> No. Your problem is your dumbness in insisting no one
    >>>>> should use GPL3 because the sky would fall down.
    >>>>> It didn't.
    >>>>> Now Get over it.
    >>>>> Plenty of projects are adopting GPL3.
    >>>>> So will I.
    >>>>
    >>>> Fine. I will *never*
    >>>> Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later" clause.
    >>>> Not ever
    >>>
    >>> Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!
    >>>

    >>
    >> What is wrong with "GPL2 only"?

    >
    > When you see how the patent game plays out, you will see.
    >


    Except I don't believe any of your GPL3-cultists idiocy
    --
    Only two things are infinite,
    the Universe and Stupidity.
    And I'm not quite sure about the former.
    - Albert Einstein


  15. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Saturday 27 October 2007 10:50 : \____

    > Mark Kent wrote:
    >
    >> Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    >>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    >>>>> 7 wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>>
    >>>< snip >
    >>>
    >>>>>>>> I provided about 10 references. You selected one of them and then
    >>>>>>>> quote-mined the article for one survey (among several others, some
    >>>>>>>> positive) which reveals a negative picture. You know, Microsoft
    >>>>>>>> funded some GPLv3 surveys too and got busted. It wasn't surprising
    >>>>>>>> to see the outcome of these surveys.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> In short: You select the ones you like. And then disregard those you
    >>>>>>> don't like because they contradict your GPL3-cult.
    >>>>>>> Why am I not surprised?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> No. Your problem is your dumbness in insisting no one
    >>>>>> should use GPL3 because the sky would fall down.
    >>>>>> It didn't.
    >>>>>> Now Get over it.
    >>>>>> Plenty of projects are adopting GPL3.
    >>>>>> So will I.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Fine. I will *never*
    >>>>> Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later" clause.
    >>>>> Not ever
    >>>>
    >>>> Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> What is wrong with "GPL2 only"?

    >>
    >> When you see how the patent game plays out, you will see.
    >>

    >
    > Except I don't believe any of your GPL3-cultists idiocy


    Peter,

    Please ignore Richard Stallman if it helps. Think of Peter Brown or other
    sophisticated people who are also perceived as businessmen.

    If you have some minutes to spare, have a look at this video as well:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwFO11UsH7w

    I'm not here to argue with you, but I want to show you things that will allow
    you to take more observations into consideration.

    The software industry changes. The NetApp and Acacia lawsuits, for example, are
    early signs. Please take this into consideration.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Reversi for Linux/Win32: http://othellomaster.com
    http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    run-level 2 2007-10-16 15:14 last=
    http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

  16. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Saturday 27 October 2007 10:50 : \____
    >
    >> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>
    >>> Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    >>>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    >>>>>> 7 wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>< snip >
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>>> I provided about 10 references. You selected one of them and then
    >>>>>>>>> quote-mined the article for one survey (among several others, some
    >>>>>>>>> positive) which reveals a negative picture. You know, Microsoft
    >>>>>>>>> funded some GPLv3 surveys too and got busted. It wasn't surprising
    >>>>>>>>> to see the outcome of these surveys.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> In short: You select the ones you like. And then disregard those
    >>>>>>>> you don't like because they contradict your GPL3-cult.
    >>>>>>>> Why am I not surprised?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> No. Your problem is your dumbness in insisting no one
    >>>>>>> should use GPL3 because the sky would fall down.
    >>>>>>> It didn't.
    >>>>>>> Now Get over it.
    >>>>>>> Plenty of projects are adopting GPL3.
    >>>>>>> So will I.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Fine. I will *never*
    >>>>>> Nothing I write will *ever* be released under a "GPL2 or later"
    >>>>>> clause. Not ever
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Fine - walk with the dinosaurs!
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> What is wrong with "GPL2 only"?
    >>>
    >>> When you see how the patent game plays out, you will see.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Except I don't believe any of your GPL3-cultists idiocy

    >
    > Peter,
    >
    > Please ignore Richard Stallman if it helps. Think of Peter Brown or other
    > sophisticated people who are also perceived as businessmen.
    >
    > If you have some minutes to spare, have a look at this video as well:
    >
    > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwFO11UsH7w
    >
    > I'm not here to argue with you, but I want to show you things that will
    > allow you to take more observations into consideration.
    >
    > The software industry changes. The NetApp and Acacia lawsuits, for
    > example, are early signs. Please take this into consideration.
    >


    What part of "you GPL3-cultists have yet to post anything not idiotic" has
    to be explained again?
    The GPL3 is *garbage* of the worst sort. *Nothing* you cultists claim will
    convince me otherwise. You can try to imply that anything you post
    as "examples" has something to do with that, and yet all you have achieved
    so far is to strenghten the distinct feeling that you are imbeciles,
    without any thought of your own
    --
    If you had any brains, you'd be dangerous.


  17. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter KŲhlmann belched out this bit o' wisdom:

    > The GPL3 is *garbage* of the worst sort.


    Linus doesn't agree with you on that one.

    --
    Tux rox!

  18. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Linonut wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o'
    > wisdom:
    >
    >> The GPL3 is *garbage* of the worst sort.

    >
    > Linus doesn't agree with you on that one.
    >


    I don't care.
    And he certainly does not mistake GPL3 for the best thing since sliced bread

    Noticed his last stance on it? It does not say he thinks it is "good". He
    only now thinks the final vesion is not quite as awful as the first
    editions of GPL3
    --
    Microsoft's Guide To System Design:
    If it starts working, we'll fix it. Pronto.


  19. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Saturday 27 October 2007 15:54 : \____

    > Linonut wrote:
    >
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o'
    >> wisdom:
    >>
    >>> The GPL3 is *garbage* of the worst sort.

    >>
    >> Linus doesn't agree with you on that one.
    >>

    >
    > I don't care.
    > And he certainly does not mistake GPL3 for the best thing since sliced bread
    >
    > Noticed his last stance on it? It does not say he thinks it is "good". He
    > only now thinks the final vesion is not quite as awful as the first
    > editions of GPL3


    Sun's decision on OpenSolaris could drive him into the new licence.
    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: Sharks are immune to cancer
    http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    16:00:02 up 11 days, 45 min, 3 users, load average: 0.83, 0.67, 0.76
    http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

  20. Re: [News] Another Win for GPLv3

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Saturday 27 October 2007 15:54 : \____
    >
    >> Linonut wrote:
    >>
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o'
    >>> wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>> The GPL3 is *garbage* of the worst sort.
    >>>
    >>> Linus doesn't agree with you on that one.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I don't care.
    >> And he certainly does not mistake GPL3 for the best thing since sliced
    >> bread
    >>
    >> Noticed his last stance on it? It does not say he thinks it is "good". He
    >> only now thinks the final vesion is not quite as awful as the first
    >> editions of GPL3

    >
    > Sun's decision on OpenSolaris could drive him into the new licence.


    More whishful thinking

    Don't you ever tire of sounding ridiculous?
    --
    If you're right 90% of the time, why quibble about the remaining 3%?


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast