Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

On Jun 19, 2007, david@xxxxxxx wrote:

if you also make the assumption that the company won't use propriatary
software instead then I think you would get agreement.

Ah, good point. When I posed the one of the two cases of the inicial
scenario as "no tivoization", I meant Free Software without
constraints.

but the disagrement is over this exact assumption. you assume that
these companies will use non-tivoized products if you make it hard
to use the software covered by the GPL, most other people are saying
that they disagree and the result would be fewer companies useing
software covered by GPL instead.

I understand that. And what I'm saying is that, even if fewer such
companies use GPLed software, you may still be better off, out of
additional contributions you'll get from customers of companies that
switch from tivoization to unconstrained Free Software, because of the
additional costs of the alternatives.

And no, I can't prove it, but it's good that at least the argument is
no longer completely disregarded while something else is disputed.


Now that you guys at least understand what the argument is, you can
figure out the solution by yourselves.

good, if you are no longer going to claim that your opinion on this unprovable point is the Truth (not the capitol) hopefully you can accept that a lot of very smart people are convinced that you are wrong on this point and not just 'confused'

David Lang
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    ... software covered by GPL instead. ... And what I'm saying is that, ... switch from tivoization to unconstrained Free Software, ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Free software vs. commercial software Was: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
    ... > So you advocate that everybody uses a license for his FREE SOFTWARE that ... > slightly different license to make use of that software? ... > unhappy about the use of the GPL in the free software community? ... > and uses it for proprietary software, if allowed by my license, he would ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: [OT] Choosing an open source license
    ... Stallman said he would tackle this problem for the 3rd version of the GPL. ... But Free Software is about protecting both the rights of the author but also the rights of the *user* of software, rights which are considered fundamental, and ensuring equity between the two. ... True freedom always has limits. ... Web services based on Free Software which don't distribute the code to their users break the principle on which Free Software was built. ...
    (comp.lang.ruby)
  • Re: the free software paradigm [was Re: Amazon used lisp & C exclusively?
    ... free software without being contracted to make specific improvements. ... the GPL ends up forcing a server model for some products ... code/logic/idea/pattern must fall in to GPL if you use GPL libraries. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Novels statement re copying SuSE 9.2 Pro
    ... > Is Novel Violating the gpl license? ... When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. ... General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom ... those which can be re-distributed for a fee can also be included in the new ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)