On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 00:30 -0400, Nick Holland wrote:

quoted text
> Obviously you have missed some of my commentaries on the GPL vs. BSD

> philosophy.  I don't hate the GPL.  I dislike it compared to the BSD

> alternative in general (I dislike milk chocolate compared to dark

> chocolate, too, but either beats the heck out of, uh, most things. :)

> but the short version is, it boils down to which you fear more:

>   Big Companies using your code and thus, you as a developer, without

>   pay or allowing you to use their code.

>     -- or --

>   Big Companies NOT using your code, and rolling their own (inferior,

>   incompatible, inconsistent, proprietary) crap instead.

A lot of big companies simply don't care. If there exists code they can

use without having to hire programmers, and without having to share

their modifications to the rest of the community, great. (And it still

amazes me that at least some big companies treat having to share under

the same conditions which let them get the code to begin with, to be

such a big deal.)
> I can make a pretty convincing case for either.  However, as much as

quoted text
> I'd dislike seeing Microsoft take OpenBSD code and ideas without

> compensation of any kind, I'd much prefer they use the code and ideas

> to not using 'em.  But that's me.  Not all may agree, and that's a

> good thing.

I'm sure they'd love to do it! Large companies like Microsoft *love* BSD

code. They can grab it, and at most, they have to give credit to the

developers in their advertisements and put the standard "AS IS" blurb in

the documentation.
> Your tone is similar to that of people who refuse to condemn the acts

quoted text
> of vandals or killers simply because they are (loosely and self-

> proclaimed) of the same arbitrary group as they are.  "An attack on

> them is an an attack on me, and we can't have that!"

I'm not saying the arbitrary removal of the original license from code

is wrong. I *am*, however, very much against the inexcusable slander of

the GNU project based on the views of a few (unfortunately)

less-than-scrupulous people.
> > Even though BSD-style licenses are compatible with the

quoted text
> > GPL, there are perfectly acceptable social goals achieved only by

> > releasing under the GPL or a similar license.

>

> holy shit.

>

> The ends ("perfectly acceptable social goals") justify the means

> (theft of intellectual property)?

I never said this. If this is what you believe, state it as your own.
--

Shawn K. Quinn