On 12/10/07, L  wrote:

quoted text
> Lars NoodC)n wrote:

> > In regards to RMS, I have yet to see critique of his ideas, especially n

> > the mainstream media.

>

> Some infamous 'mainstream media' critique:

> [..more of the same: ..]

> http://z505.com/GNU-Violation-Press-Release1.htm

<<>

In fairness, these charges seem overzealous; deliberately

misinterpretting the spirit of the GPL. I don't know, though, so I'd

like it to be cleared up; as I understand it, a web app doesn't count

as "publishing"; people just using code like that are under no

obligation to publish it, and it's just the author/vendor who is

obligated to provide source.

Though, I suppose RMS (a hypothetical, consistent RMS) mght argue that

if you are providing a "web app" piece of software, then if your users

cannot edit your site on you ("modify software they use") then you are

violating the Four Freedoms and the GPL.

Is any of that anywhere near reality?
Argh, the GPL is so ridiculously complex; nobody understands it. The

main attraction open source has for me is that I *don't have to think

about licensing shit*, and GNU (especially now with GPLv3) miss that

goal completely.
-Nick