Open Source != GPL. The latest salvo from M$ basically is a counter-offensive
(anti-viral, considering the viral-ness of the GPL) that says "Even though
the GPL states that other non-free software that includes GPLed software must
be GPLed, we state that you can't use our software in conjunction with GPLed
software," which would prevent the viral nature of the GPL from "polluting"
M$'s code, and thus causing it to become free (both libra and gratis). M$ may
be using Open Source Software, but lately the word on this is that it's
OpenBSD software, which isn't GPL, but is still "open." M$ clearly doesn't
mind using that, since they can take it and make it "proprietary," i.e., they
are not required to release any changes as source code. Apple's done the same
thing with Mac OS X, BTW.
Russell
On Friday 22 June 2001 09:05, you wrote:
> It occurs to me since that M$ is using Open Source/GPL code and software to
> tie their own closed source code together. Doesn't that mean they are in
> violation of the GPL terms? Or am I oversimplifying the argument?
>
> Tony
>
> Henry A. Sutter
> Hillsborough County Schools
> Title 1
> 901 E. Kennedy Blvd.
> Tampa, Florida, 33602
> Ph# 813.272.4613 Fx# 813.272.4434
> sutter_h@popmail.firn.edu
> "You expect me to build a mnemonic memory device with ..stone knives and
> bearskins" SPOCK
> Join the Electronic Frontier Foundation http://www.eff.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:32:13 EDT