Defender of the Linux faith

TalkBack 16 of 101:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Nobody say you have to

>>>This is a perfect reason not too.<<<

Then don't use it. You are free to go with proprietary software with unconscionable licensing terms, built in back doors and EULAs where you agree to allow access to you personal property to software companies that have a right, according to the terms of the EULA you agree to, to disable anything on your machine they want to. Oh, if they cause damage to your machine you also agree to limit liability for damages to five dollars. Not to mention the fact the BSA can come into your business and shut you down while they look for violations that will cost you $50,000.00 a pop.

Yip, you're correct. The lopsided agreements and surrendering of all your rights and remedies is definitely the better way to go. Have at it.

The rest of us will take our chances with free software.

Oh, yeah, for the mentally challenged of you out there, the GPL is just one of dozens of licenses available. Many of them are perfectly compatitable with commercial software. You are so accustomed to being in your slave relationship with proprietary companies that you have resigned yourself to the belief that is all there is. It sucks to be you. The GPL is not a problem, except for companies like MS that are incapable of writing anything original and get most of their software from BSD. MS cannot lift GPL code and use it. That is their problem. Don't agree? Then explain why so many companies are attempting to incorporate and conceal the fact they are using GPL code in their products. You cannot name a single OSS developer that has ever incorporated proprietry code into their original innovations. You'd be hard-pressed to find a proprietary company that does not routinely incorporate OSS code into their products. The strain of writing original code must be too great a burden for the to bear. Besides, why write it when you can simply steal from OSS?

>>>Hmmm. This is a touchy subject for fans of open source that are also litigators<<<

Odd you find it so disturbing that people desire to protect their copyrights that you fire derogatory remarks at them. Hmmm, do you also condemn proprietary companies when they go after copyright infringers? Or, being in the anti-freedom religious group, you find that acceptable? The hypocrisy of the defenders of the master-slave software religion find it perfectly acceptable their masters go after copyright infringers yet condemn indepent developers for it. Must be part of the brainwashing you get at the 14-day wonder 'boot camps' you pay $10,000.00 to attend.
But, hey, nobody says you have to use any OSS. Of course you demi-gods thrive on it. Without BSD licensed software MS would still have no networking capabilities since they lifted their TCP/IP directly from BSD along with kerberos and LDAP, which they added a proprietary bit and now claim their own, renaming it AD. The hypocrisy coming from the anti-freedom religious folks reaches new heights as each day passes.

Posted by: bystander_z   Posted on: 03/20/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• Five Steps to Determine When to Virtualize YourServers VMware Server virtualization isn't just for big companies. Entry-level ... Download Now
• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now